<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_15_172257</id>
	<title>Are You a Blue-Collar Or White-Collar Developer?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1258309440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jammag writes <i>"Some developers have gone to four-year universities, where they've also studied subjects like history and sociology, while other coders go to vocational schools and focus purely on writing great software. So why, asks a longtime developer, is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree, <a href="http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/features/article.php/3848406/Are-You-a-Blue-Collar-or-White-Collar-Developer.htm">when 'blue collar' coders might be better trained</a>? Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference &mdash; and generally giving better pay to four-year grads? Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jammag writes " Some developers have gone to four-year universities , where they 've also studied subjects like history and sociology , while other coders go to vocational schools and focus purely on writing great software .
So why , asks a longtime developer , is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree , when 'blue collar ' coders might be better trained ?
Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference    and generally giving better pay to four-year grads ?
Is n't being a developer about real skill level , not the piece of paper on the wall ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jammag writes "Some developers have gone to four-year universities, where they've also studied subjects like history and sociology, while other coders go to vocational schools and focus purely on writing great software.
So why, asks a longtime developer, is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree, when 'blue collar' coders might be better trained?
Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference — and generally giving better pay to four-year grads?
Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108524</id>
	<title>Re:Slaves wear collars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258277340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but is it the "three moon wolf" shirt our editors allude to?</p><p>(I've never seen one, but it's got to be three times as sweet as a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Mens-Three-Short-Sleeve/dp/B002HJ377A" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">three wolf moon shirt</a> [amazon.com] and I'd bet it would get me more chicks at the SF/Fantasy con.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but is it the " three moon wolf " shirt our editors allude to ?
( I 've never seen one , but it 's got to be three times as sweet as a three wolf moon shirt [ amazon.com ] and I 'd bet it would get me more chicks at the SF/Fantasy con .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but is it the "three moon wolf" shirt our editors allude to?
(I've never seen one, but it's got to be three times as sweet as a three wolf moon shirt [amazon.com] and I'd bet it would get me more chicks at the SF/Fantasy con.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108510</id>
	<title>It's not necessarily the stuff learned in the</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1258277280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>extra 2 years, but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that. The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to "run with" and compete against.</i></p><p>I think there's something everyone is missing in this discussion, what's wrong with doing both?  Why not go to a 2 year college to learn the basics of programing?  Graduates from the 2 year college can then work as a code monkey getting experience while they work on their 4 year degree.  It'd be like having an intern for 2, or 3, or 4 years.  I haven't looked lately but on the lists of requirements for jobs I've seen is x number of years of experience.  Better yet, once someone has transfered to the 4 year college they could also minor in another field, such as finance.  Being a programmer with knowledge of finance would be of benefit in the financial arena.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>extra 2 years , but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that .
The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to " run with " and compete against.I think there 's something everyone is missing in this discussion , what 's wrong with doing both ?
Why not go to a 2 year college to learn the basics of programing ?
Graduates from the 2 year college can then work as a code monkey getting experience while they work on their 4 year degree .
It 'd be like having an intern for 2 , or 3 , or 4 years .
I have n't looked lately but on the lists of requirements for jobs I 've seen is x number of years of experience .
Better yet , once someone has transfered to the 4 year college they could also minor in another field , such as finance .
Being a programmer with knowledge of finance would be of benefit in the financial arena .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>extra 2 years, but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that.
The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to "run with" and compete against.I think there's something everyone is missing in this discussion, what's wrong with doing both?
Why not go to a 2 year college to learn the basics of programing?
Graduates from the 2 year college can then work as a code monkey getting experience while they work on their 4 year degree.
It'd be like having an intern for 2, or 3, or 4 years.
I haven't looked lately but on the lists of requirements for jobs I've seen is x number of years of experience.
Better yet, once someone has transfered to the 4 year college they could also minor in another field, such as finance.
Being a programmer with knowledge of finance would be of benefit in the financial arena.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107716</id>
	<title>You're an idiot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My guess is you are an undereducated technical school graduate who feels they deserve more money.  You don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is you are an undereducated technical school graduate who feels they deserve more money .
You do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is you are an undereducated technical school graduate who feels they deserve more money.
You don't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111932</id>
	<title>Article is about a dick measuring contest.</title>
	<author>Vellmont</author>
	<datestamp>1258305840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it really matter which one is "better"?  This article seems to be about people defending own personal choices and make some assumption about which education prepared them better.  The only thing that REALLY matters is what you can actually produce, not your credentials.  This is about class conflict, and nothing else.</p><p>I'm met college educated morons, non-college educated wizards, and the reverse.  As the comedian Ron White says "You can't fix stupid".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it really matter which one is " better " ?
This article seems to be about people defending own personal choices and make some assumption about which education prepared them better .
The only thing that REALLY matters is what you can actually produce , not your credentials .
This is about class conflict , and nothing else.I 'm met college educated morons , non-college educated wizards , and the reverse .
As the comedian Ron White says " You ca n't fix stupid " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it really matter which one is "better"?
This article seems to be about people defending own personal choices and make some assumption about which education prepared them better.
The only thing that REALLY matters is what you can actually produce, not your credentials.
This is about class conflict, and nothing else.I'm met college educated morons, non-college educated wizards, and the reverse.
As the comedian Ron White says "You can't fix stupid".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30119708</id>
	<title>Because of human resources crap.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1258402740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they cant define their place and use in modern business structure, they cant tell you exactly how reliable are their methods, there arent even any widely accepted and practiced accurate methods to use in that field.</p><p>instead, they invent various stuff to justify themselves, apart from the salary handling job they do. one of these is the hirings. because this 'department' lacks valid tools, the foremost thing they rely on is the 'education' history. they determine 'requirements' to be eligible. degree from this, degree from that, this much experience, that much shit. in the end they end up refusing usable employees, and stacking up on 'career' people, who take their own careers and their own personal standing more important than anything else.</p><p>a friend of mine here, a software engineer himself, had just completed the year 2000 transition for the systems of 2nd biggest insurance company, and then set out to look for another job. he applied to the nation's largest insurance company. the company's it manager went berserk - he was exactly what they were needing ; there was only a month till year 2000, much work to be done, and the person who he was interviewing (my friend) was the person who did exactly what he needed just a few days ago.</p><p>BUT.</p><p>the insurance company belonged to a big bank. and, the human resources department they were using was the bank's. (it was central to all subsidiaries). so, as a formality, he had to send him to the hr of the bank.</p><p>but thats not all there's to it. that bank im speaking about is the largest, biggest bank in my country. and its insurance arm is the biggest insurance arm, insuring a lot of business fields and individuals.</p><p>if a single glitch happened in the insurance company's systems, due to the work not being done in time, due to the self justification needs of the MORONS in that bank's hr department, it would be a major crisis in the country, causing god knows how much damage. leave aside the public image of the insurer and the bank.</p><p>in another similar example, just look at microsoft. they value degrees, titles, credentials there. that's part of their company culture.</p><p>and look at how this works for them. look at the innumerable, half assed done stuff in their products, as if the programmers just wanted to do the bare minimum to get through the tasks, and get their salary and promotions. and look how this is working for a lot of our friends, relatives and our business circle, where their products are used.</p><p>that should be a good example of a monolithic, dinosaur minded, old corporate culture hampering everyone including themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they cant define their place and use in modern business structure , they cant tell you exactly how reliable are their methods , there arent even any widely accepted and practiced accurate methods to use in that field.instead , they invent various stuff to justify themselves , apart from the salary handling job they do .
one of these is the hirings .
because this 'department ' lacks valid tools , the foremost thing they rely on is the 'education ' history .
they determine 'requirements ' to be eligible .
degree from this , degree from that , this much experience , that much shit .
in the end they end up refusing usable employees , and stacking up on 'career ' people , who take their own careers and their own personal standing more important than anything else.a friend of mine here , a software engineer himself , had just completed the year 2000 transition for the systems of 2nd biggest insurance company , and then set out to look for another job .
he applied to the nation 's largest insurance company .
the company 's it manager went berserk - he was exactly what they were needing ; there was only a month till year 2000 , much work to be done , and the person who he was interviewing ( my friend ) was the person who did exactly what he needed just a few days ago.BUT.the insurance company belonged to a big bank .
and , the human resources department they were using was the bank 's .
( it was central to all subsidiaries ) .
so , as a formality , he had to send him to the hr of the bank.but thats not all there 's to it .
that bank im speaking about is the largest , biggest bank in my country .
and its insurance arm is the biggest insurance arm , insuring a lot of business fields and individuals.if a single glitch happened in the insurance company 's systems , due to the work not being done in time , due to the self justification needs of the MORONS in that bank 's hr department , it would be a major crisis in the country , causing god knows how much damage .
leave aside the public image of the insurer and the bank.in another similar example , just look at microsoft .
they value degrees , titles , credentials there .
that 's part of their company culture.and look at how this works for them .
look at the innumerable , half assed done stuff in their products , as if the programmers just wanted to do the bare minimum to get through the tasks , and get their salary and promotions .
and look how this is working for a lot of our friends , relatives and our business circle , where their products are used.that should be a good example of a monolithic , dinosaur minded , old corporate culture hampering everyone including themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they cant define their place and use in modern business structure, they cant tell you exactly how reliable are their methods, there arent even any widely accepted and practiced accurate methods to use in that field.instead, they invent various stuff to justify themselves, apart from the salary handling job they do.
one of these is the hirings.
because this 'department' lacks valid tools, the foremost thing they rely on is the 'education' history.
they determine 'requirements' to be eligible.
degree from this, degree from that, this much experience, that much shit.
in the end they end up refusing usable employees, and stacking up on 'career' people, who take their own careers and their own personal standing more important than anything else.a friend of mine here, a software engineer himself, had just completed the year 2000 transition for the systems of 2nd biggest insurance company, and then set out to look for another job.
he applied to the nation's largest insurance company.
the company's it manager went berserk - he was exactly what they were needing ; there was only a month till year 2000, much work to be done, and the person who he was interviewing (my friend) was the person who did exactly what he needed just a few days ago.BUT.the insurance company belonged to a big bank.
and, the human resources department they were using was the bank's.
(it was central to all subsidiaries).
so, as a formality, he had to send him to the hr of the bank.but thats not all there's to it.
that bank im speaking about is the largest, biggest bank in my country.
and its insurance arm is the biggest insurance arm, insuring a lot of business fields and individuals.if a single glitch happened in the insurance company's systems, due to the work not being done in time, due to the self justification needs of the MORONS in that bank's hr department, it would be a major crisis in the country, causing god knows how much damage.
leave aside the public image of the insurer and the bank.in another similar example, just look at microsoft.
they value degrees, titles, credentials there.
that's part of their company culture.and look at how this works for them.
look at the innumerable, half assed done stuff in their products, as if the programmers just wanted to do the bare minimum to get through the tasks, and get their salary and promotions.
and look how this is working for a lot of our friends, relatives and our business circle, where their products are used.that should be a good example of a monolithic, dinosaur minded, old corporate culture hampering everyone including themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111698</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258303020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well put.</p><p>A</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well put.A</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well put.A</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109234</id>
	<title>The Wizard of Oz</title>
	<author>Greyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1258282260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a degree."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I ca n't give you a brain , so I 'll give you a degree .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a degree.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30134286</id>
	<title>Unix was developed at Berkeley, not Strayer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258450560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'nuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'nuff said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111330</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Thing 1</author>
	<datestamp>1258299780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match [...]</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Now this, I'd like to see.  Did he put down his sandwich, or just gropingly reach for his zipper?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match [ ... ] Now this , I 'd like to see .
Did he put down his sandwich , or just gropingly reach for his zipper ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match [...]
Now this, I'd like to see.
Did he put down his sandwich, or just gropingly reach for his zipper?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108320</id>
	<title>college makes you more well rounded</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258276140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went to a liberal arts college and got a major in Comp Sci and a minor in English.  My minor probably doesn't help a whole lot in my job (except for writing test plans with correct spelling and grammar) but has helped me to be more human and more rounded outside of work.  I have always felt that going to college, although in some ways a preparation for a career, should not be "just another stop on the assembly line".</p><p>So while I agree that your minor and other courses can help you in your job in other ways that can't be as quantified as a course in database systems, I have never worried that those courses are not going to have as high a "return on investment" as my comp sci courses.  I feel that software development requires a creative mind as well as an analytical one, but don't see many employers that do more than pay lip service to valuing creativity in their developers.  Bottom line is that I took English courses because it is something that has always interested me and continues to interest me, and I don't even think about how it helps me in my career.  We as humans were not meant to distill all of our interests into one singular endeavor that society has determined will make us more money than all other subjects we are interested in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to a liberal arts college and got a major in Comp Sci and a minor in English .
My minor probably does n't help a whole lot in my job ( except for writing test plans with correct spelling and grammar ) but has helped me to be more human and more rounded outside of work .
I have always felt that going to college , although in some ways a preparation for a career , should not be " just another stop on the assembly line " .So while I agree that your minor and other courses can help you in your job in other ways that ca n't be as quantified as a course in database systems , I have never worried that those courses are not going to have as high a " return on investment " as my comp sci courses .
I feel that software development requires a creative mind as well as an analytical one , but do n't see many employers that do more than pay lip service to valuing creativity in their developers .
Bottom line is that I took English courses because it is something that has always interested me and continues to interest me , and I do n't even think about how it helps me in my career .
We as humans were not meant to distill all of our interests into one singular endeavor that society has determined will make us more money than all other subjects we are interested in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to a liberal arts college and got a major in Comp Sci and a minor in English.
My minor probably doesn't help a whole lot in my job (except for writing test plans with correct spelling and grammar) but has helped me to be more human and more rounded outside of work.
I have always felt that going to college, although in some ways a preparation for a career, should not be "just another stop on the assembly line".So while I agree that your minor and other courses can help you in your job in other ways that can't be as quantified as a course in database systems, I have never worried that those courses are not going to have as high a "return on investment" as my comp sci courses.
I feel that software development requires a creative mind as well as an analytical one, but don't see many employers that do more than pay lip service to valuing creativity in their developers.
Bottom line is that I took English courses because it is something that has always interested me and continues to interest me, and I don't even think about how it helps me in my career.
We as humans were not meant to distill all of our interests into one singular endeavor that society has determined will make us more money than all other subjects we are interested in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107624</id>
	<title>Been blue collar, Done blue Collar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258315740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked for a non-tech engineering firm.  We needed serious developer help to save at least 30\% (often closer to 300\%) on the efficiency of our data analysis and reporting.</p><p>We hired a guy... four year degree, listed his creds and languages.  Lazy dude.  I had to teach him how to use the goog for shortcuts.  He wasted over a day trying to implement datediff.</p><p>He obviously didn't last.  Suffice it to say, I started developing everything that I could reasonably do.  I was asked to "clean up" a project he had done.  What my employers wanted was a real program built from his excel spreadsheet that was terribly difficult to use, and often of little use.  They wanted functionality out of it that simply could not be achieved from an excel spreadsheet with 1000 lines of undocumented VBA.</p><p>I told them that in 2 months I could give them a reasonably functioning prototype, for internal use only.  There would be no way I could competently write, document, and debug a program that would be worth a sale, and would meet all of the legal responsibility therein.</p><p>Within two months, I learned C#, wrote and tested like 18,000 lines of code, and had a reasonably strong candidate to be a foundation for a good software package.  Eventually.  I had never written a windowed app before.  It did some pretty awesome data analysis, and had at least one intuitive and what I would consider dynamic aspect regarding the interface.  Anyway, everyone was so impressed that they decided that they needed to immediately sell this program to local engineering outfits.  This poorly documented and still somewhat bug-ridden unfinished app.</p><p>They asked me if I could get it up to par, and meet the specific requirements of at least one govt. entity within a month.  I said absolutely not... I would need six months and two other blue collar people.  Additionally, they would need lawyers who specialized in the the intellectual property aspects.  Of course this small time firm had no interest in that kind of expenditure.  I said maybe a real developer could do it.  You can't sell ramshackle.</p><p>They decided to move forward.  I decided to quit.  There would be absolutely no way I would provide support for this product.  I made it clear in the beginning, I can write something for internal use, not for every possible scenario that some salesman can offer to anyone... none of whom have any idea of the complexities of coding.</p><p>White collar, definitely.  Pay the extra cash, to get what you pay for.  Yes, someone intelligent can write some software to do something.  No, they cannot usually write a software package, with very high interoperability and expandability demands.  Spec it all out in advance and send it out-of-house.  Fire salesman who promise what they cannot deliver and have no understanding of.  Additionally, if you are not a software firm, do not engage in the sale of software.  Especially if it was hacked together under high stress and tight deadlines by someone who has no business doing it.</p><p>That is not to say that it was a bad idea for in house data analysis.  It did what we needed to do.  Don't stretch yourself out so thin that you lose site of what services you actually provided, instead of what pie-in-the-sky services you want to maybe provide someday down the road, though it is clearly far outside the scope of your business model.  Stretching yourself too thin is how you lose Risk.  Everyone wants Asia, but you can try to take all of Africa and Europe at the same.  You'll invariably get defeated.  After like 8-12 hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked for a non-tech engineering firm .
We needed serious developer help to save at least 30 \ % ( often closer to 300 \ % ) on the efficiency of our data analysis and reporting.We hired a guy... four year degree , listed his creds and languages .
Lazy dude .
I had to teach him how to use the goog for shortcuts .
He wasted over a day trying to implement datediff.He obviously did n't last .
Suffice it to say , I started developing everything that I could reasonably do .
I was asked to " clean up " a project he had done .
What my employers wanted was a real program built from his excel spreadsheet that was terribly difficult to use , and often of little use .
They wanted functionality out of it that simply could not be achieved from an excel spreadsheet with 1000 lines of undocumented VBA.I told them that in 2 months I could give them a reasonably functioning prototype , for internal use only .
There would be no way I could competently write , document , and debug a program that would be worth a sale , and would meet all of the legal responsibility therein.Within two months , I learned C # , wrote and tested like 18,000 lines of code , and had a reasonably strong candidate to be a foundation for a good software package .
Eventually. I had never written a windowed app before .
It did some pretty awesome data analysis , and had at least one intuitive and what I would consider dynamic aspect regarding the interface .
Anyway , everyone was so impressed that they decided that they needed to immediately sell this program to local engineering outfits .
This poorly documented and still somewhat bug-ridden unfinished app.They asked me if I could get it up to par , and meet the specific requirements of at least one govt .
entity within a month .
I said absolutely not... I would need six months and two other blue collar people .
Additionally , they would need lawyers who specialized in the the intellectual property aspects .
Of course this small time firm had no interest in that kind of expenditure .
I said maybe a real developer could do it .
You ca n't sell ramshackle.They decided to move forward .
I decided to quit .
There would be absolutely no way I would provide support for this product .
I made it clear in the beginning , I can write something for internal use , not for every possible scenario that some salesman can offer to anyone... none of whom have any idea of the complexities of coding.White collar , definitely .
Pay the extra cash , to get what you pay for .
Yes , someone intelligent can write some software to do something .
No , they can not usually write a software package , with very high interoperability and expandability demands .
Spec it all out in advance and send it out-of-house .
Fire salesman who promise what they can not deliver and have no understanding of .
Additionally , if you are not a software firm , do not engage in the sale of software .
Especially if it was hacked together under high stress and tight deadlines by someone who has no business doing it.That is not to say that it was a bad idea for in house data analysis .
It did what we needed to do .
Do n't stretch yourself out so thin that you lose site of what services you actually provided , instead of what pie-in-the-sky services you want to maybe provide someday down the road , though it is clearly far outside the scope of your business model .
Stretching yourself too thin is how you lose Risk .
Everyone wants Asia , but you can try to take all of Africa and Europe at the same .
You 'll invariably get defeated .
After like 8-12 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked for a non-tech engineering firm.
We needed serious developer help to save at least 30\% (often closer to 300\%) on the efficiency of our data analysis and reporting.We hired a guy... four year degree, listed his creds and languages.
Lazy dude.
I had to teach him how to use the goog for shortcuts.
He wasted over a day trying to implement datediff.He obviously didn't last.
Suffice it to say, I started developing everything that I could reasonably do.
I was asked to "clean up" a project he had done.
What my employers wanted was a real program built from his excel spreadsheet that was terribly difficult to use, and often of little use.
They wanted functionality out of it that simply could not be achieved from an excel spreadsheet with 1000 lines of undocumented VBA.I told them that in 2 months I could give them a reasonably functioning prototype, for internal use only.
There would be no way I could competently write, document, and debug a program that would be worth a sale, and would meet all of the legal responsibility therein.Within two months, I learned C#, wrote and tested like 18,000 lines of code, and had a reasonably strong candidate to be a foundation for a good software package.
Eventually.  I had never written a windowed app before.
It did some pretty awesome data analysis, and had at least one intuitive and what I would consider dynamic aspect regarding the interface.
Anyway, everyone was so impressed that they decided that they needed to immediately sell this program to local engineering outfits.
This poorly documented and still somewhat bug-ridden unfinished app.They asked me if I could get it up to par, and meet the specific requirements of at least one govt.
entity within a month.
I said absolutely not... I would need six months and two other blue collar people.
Additionally, they would need lawyers who specialized in the the intellectual property aspects.
Of course this small time firm had no interest in that kind of expenditure.
I said maybe a real developer could do it.
You can't sell ramshackle.They decided to move forward.
I decided to quit.
There would be absolutely no way I would provide support for this product.
I made it clear in the beginning, I can write something for internal use, not for every possible scenario that some salesman can offer to anyone... none of whom have any idea of the complexities of coding.White collar, definitely.
Pay the extra cash, to get what you pay for.
Yes, someone intelligent can write some software to do something.
No, they cannot usually write a software package, with very high interoperability and expandability demands.
Spec it all out in advance and send it out-of-house.
Fire salesman who promise what they cannot deliver and have no understanding of.
Additionally, if you are not a software firm, do not engage in the sale of software.
Especially if it was hacked together under high stress and tight deadlines by someone who has no business doing it.That is not to say that it was a bad idea for in house data analysis.
It did what we needed to do.
Don't stretch yourself out so thin that you lose site of what services you actually provided, instead of what pie-in-the-sky services you want to maybe provide someday down the road, though it is clearly far outside the scope of your business model.
Stretching yourself too thin is how you lose Risk.
Everyone wants Asia, but you can try to take all of Africa and Europe at the same.
You'll invariably get defeated.
After like 8-12 hours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109396</id>
	<title>education is priceless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258283400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hi,</p><p>I'm almost laughing, having a degree in agriculture and working as IT professional. It's about having the skills to learn, and apply that to the specific problem. Coding never is the problem, what you are trying to solve with the help of computing is. Being really smart at it is tough. An equation I use often, it is really easy to play a guitar, to excel at playing one, is a different story, and a broader sense of learning will help.</p><p>my 2 cents</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hi,I 'm almost laughing , having a degree in agriculture and working as IT professional .
It 's about having the skills to learn , and apply that to the specific problem .
Coding never is the problem , what you are trying to solve with the help of computing is .
Being really smart at it is tough .
An equation I use often , it is really easy to play a guitar , to excel at playing one , is a different story , and a broader sense of learning will help.my 2 cents</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hi,I'm almost laughing, having a degree in agriculture and working as IT professional.
It's about having the skills to learn, and apply that to the specific problem.
Coding never is the problem, what you are trying to solve with the help of computing is.
Being really smart at it is tough.
An equation I use often, it is really easy to play a guitar, to excel at playing one, is a different story, and a broader sense of learning will help.my 2 cents</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110630</id>
	<title>Been that way for a while in engineering....</title>
	<author>Ellis D. Tripp</author>
	<datestamp>1258292640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code...</p></div><p>CS must be heading down the same road as engineering curricula, then. It is quite worrying how many modern EE graduates never learn how to use a soldering iron or multimeter, or how many ME grads can't manage to drill and tap a hole...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C + + 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code...CS must be heading down the same road as engineering curricula , then .
It is quite worrying how many modern EE graduates never learn how to use a soldering iron or multimeter , or how many ME grads ca n't manage to drill and tap a hole.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code...CS must be heading down the same road as engineering curricula, then.
It is quite worrying how many modern EE graduates never learn how to use a soldering iron or multimeter, or how many ME grads can't manage to drill and tap a hole...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107826</id>
	<title>2003 Interview Experience</title>
	<author>bhunachchicken</author>
	<datestamp>1258316880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>During 2003, when the whole dot com bubble bursting thing was going on, I was out of work. I'd been out of work for about 4 months, when I got a telephone interview request for a major online company that offers last minute deals.</p><p>I took the interview and talked to the hiring manager about all my experience, etc. I also spoke with the team lead and another developer, who all seemed very impressed with what I had done (I had previously worked for nearly 3 years at a retail bank). They asked me if I could come up to London the next day for a face to face interview, and for what would be the final round.</p><p>Great, eh? Pleased, I said I would see them the next day at 2pm. About 5 minutes after ending the call, the hiring manager called me back. He had one question for me.</p><p>"Sorry, Stephen, but could you tell me what degree you got?"

</p><p>I told him I received a pass in Environmental Biology.</p><p>"Oh," he said. "Well, we're really looking for someone with a degree in computer science."</p><p>I was stunned. After answering all their question perfectly, THAT was the issue?!!</p><p>"So, you don't want me to come up tomorrow?" I said.</p><p>"No, sorry," he replied, and hung up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>During 2003 , when the whole dot com bubble bursting thing was going on , I was out of work .
I 'd been out of work for about 4 months , when I got a telephone interview request for a major online company that offers last minute deals.I took the interview and talked to the hiring manager about all my experience , etc .
I also spoke with the team lead and another developer , who all seemed very impressed with what I had done ( I had previously worked for nearly 3 years at a retail bank ) .
They asked me if I could come up to London the next day for a face to face interview , and for what would be the final round.Great , eh ?
Pleased , I said I would see them the next day at 2pm .
About 5 minutes after ending the call , the hiring manager called me back .
He had one question for me .
" Sorry , Stephen , but could you tell me what degree you got ?
" I told him I received a pass in Environmental Biology .
" Oh , " he said .
" Well , we 're really looking for someone with a degree in computer science .
" I was stunned .
After answering all their question perfectly , THAT was the issue ? ! !
" So , you do n't want me to come up tomorrow ?
" I said .
" No , sorry , " he replied , and hung up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During 2003, when the whole dot com bubble bursting thing was going on, I was out of work.
I'd been out of work for about 4 months, when I got a telephone interview request for a major online company that offers last minute deals.I took the interview and talked to the hiring manager about all my experience, etc.
I also spoke with the team lead and another developer, who all seemed very impressed with what I had done (I had previously worked for nearly 3 years at a retail bank).
They asked me if I could come up to London the next day for a face to face interview, and for what would be the final round.Great, eh?
Pleased, I said I would see them the next day at 2pm.
About 5 minutes after ending the call, the hiring manager called me back.
He had one question for me.
"Sorry, Stephen, but could you tell me what degree you got?
"

I told him I received a pass in Environmental Biology.
"Oh," he said.
"Well, we're really looking for someone with a degree in computer science.
"I was stunned.
After answering all their question perfectly, THAT was the issue?!!
"So, you don't want me to come up tomorrow?
" I said.
"No, sorry," he replied, and hung up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108016</id>
	<title>Worth the paper it's printed on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of all the developers I've hired, the overwhelming majority of the really *good* ones had a little technical school or community college under their belts but were mostly self-taught.  Time and time again I got kids with fresh new 4-year CS degrees whose skills were years behind the times - and these are the ones who expect to start at $80k doing web development.  I usually ended up canning them and promoting someone who a year earlier knew nothing but HTML and JS.  Passion and dedication mean a hell of a lot more than formal training, at least for web development.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of all the developers I 've hired , the overwhelming majority of the really * good * ones had a little technical school or community college under their belts but were mostly self-taught .
Time and time again I got kids with fresh new 4-year CS degrees whose skills were years behind the times - and these are the ones who expect to start at $ 80k doing web development .
I usually ended up canning them and promoting someone who a year earlier knew nothing but HTML and JS .
Passion and dedication mean a hell of a lot more than formal training , at least for web development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of all the developers I've hired, the overwhelming majority of the really *good* ones had a little technical school or community college under their belts but were mostly self-taught.
Time and time again I got kids with fresh new 4-year CS degrees whose skills were years behind the times - and these are the ones who expect to start at $80k doing web development.
I usually ended up canning them and promoting someone who a year earlier knew nothing but HTML and JS.
Passion and dedication mean a hell of a lot more than formal training, at least for web development.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110906</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Binder</author>
	<datestamp>1258295520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue is more like this.<br>If you don't know what a splay tree is you will never know when to use one.  It's a problem of not knowing what you don't know.  It is very rare that you will need a datastructure and then go find one.  You will use the tools you have to solve the problems in front of you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue is more like this.If you do n't know what a splay tree is you will never know when to use one .
It 's a problem of not knowing what you do n't know .
It is very rare that you will need a datastructure and then go find one .
You will use the tools you have to solve the problems in front of you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue is more like this.If you don't know what a splay tree is you will never know when to use one.
It's a problem of not knowing what you don't know.
It is very rare that you will need a datastructure and then go find one.
You will use the tools you have to solve the problems in front of you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107634</id>
	<title>So I'm boned then</title>
	<author>jabjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1258315800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After doing an art course BTEC I went on to uni to a Virtual Reality course. It was a joke, mostly really a web site design course. We had a "professional" 3d animator, who didn't know what IK or skinning was. The software we were to use couldn't do shading and texturing at the same time, and was really really slow. They were paying top dollar for OpenGL cards that just weren't as fast as much cheaper gaming cards. After the first year, over the summer I wrote a software 3D engine on my old computer, when I went back I just couldn't relate to the tutors or students. I dropped out, spent 6 months moving myself to Windows and OpenGL, and then got a job programming, speeding up a start ups 3D engine. Not looked back for 9 years, until recently, I can see without a degree to my name there is a glass ceiling. But with kid on the way and getting a bit to old to be a whiz kid anymore, even if I could stomach it, going to uni isn't an option. I've not found any quick path course for someone like me. Did some maths with the Open University, but it was easy and I struggled to force myself to complete it (though I did and got 91\%). I never stopped teaching myself, got into OSs and Linux in the last few years and am just about to finish Lions Unix Commentary (a master piece!). I have worked with many who do have degrees, some are good, some are crap, I seen one guy who was a CS doctor and was crap, but I think I'm stuck with out this bit of paper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After doing an art course BTEC I went on to uni to a Virtual Reality course .
It was a joke , mostly really a web site design course .
We had a " professional " 3d animator , who did n't know what IK or skinning was .
The software we were to use could n't do shading and texturing at the same time , and was really really slow .
They were paying top dollar for OpenGL cards that just were n't as fast as much cheaper gaming cards .
After the first year , over the summer I wrote a software 3D engine on my old computer , when I went back I just could n't relate to the tutors or students .
I dropped out , spent 6 months moving myself to Windows and OpenGL , and then got a job programming , speeding up a start ups 3D engine .
Not looked back for 9 years , until recently , I can see without a degree to my name there is a glass ceiling .
But with kid on the way and getting a bit to old to be a whiz kid anymore , even if I could stomach it , going to uni is n't an option .
I 've not found any quick path course for someone like me .
Did some maths with the Open University , but it was easy and I struggled to force myself to complete it ( though I did and got 91 \ % ) .
I never stopped teaching myself , got into OSs and Linux in the last few years and am just about to finish Lions Unix Commentary ( a master piece ! ) .
I have worked with many who do have degrees , some are good , some are crap , I seen one guy who was a CS doctor and was crap , but I think I 'm stuck with out this bit of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After doing an art course BTEC I went on to uni to a Virtual Reality course.
It was a joke, mostly really a web site design course.
We had a "professional" 3d animator, who didn't know what IK or skinning was.
The software we were to use couldn't do shading and texturing at the same time, and was really really slow.
They were paying top dollar for OpenGL cards that just weren't as fast as much cheaper gaming cards.
After the first year, over the summer I wrote a software 3D engine on my old computer, when I went back I just couldn't relate to the tutors or students.
I dropped out, spent 6 months moving myself to Windows and OpenGL, and then got a job programming, speeding up a start ups 3D engine.
Not looked back for 9 years, until recently, I can see without a degree to my name there is a glass ceiling.
But with kid on the way and getting a bit to old to be a whiz kid anymore, even if I could stomach it, going to uni isn't an option.
I've not found any quick path course for someone like me.
Did some maths with the Open University, but it was easy and I struggled to force myself to complete it (though I did and got 91\%).
I never stopped teaching myself, got into OSs and Linux in the last few years and am just about to finish Lions Unix Commentary (a master piece!).
I have worked with many who do have degrees, some are good, some are crap, I seen one guy who was a CS doctor and was crap, but I think I'm stuck with out this bit of paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30121440</id>
	<title>SrDeveloper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258365900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a question:</p><p>A candidate with 10 years of real world experience and rave reviews or a candidate with an MS fresh to the market?  All else being equal, who would you take?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a question : A candidate with 10 years of real world experience and rave reviews or a candidate with an MS fresh to the market ?
All else being equal , who would you take ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a question:A candidate with 10 years of real world experience and rave reviews or a candidate with an MS fresh to the market?
All else being equal, who would you take?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107982</id>
	<title>It's the Wrong Question--For the Most Part</title>
	<author>CAOgdin</author>
	<datestamp>1258317540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I believe, after 53 years in this industry, you're likely asking the wrong question.<br> <br>

I learned programming BEFORE there were schools of any kind, but my mentors, Bill Orchard-Hays was a mathemetician, and Eli Hellerman had his Bachelor's in Statistics, and a Masters in Conducting.  Jack Moshman was a world-leading Operation Research Ph.D.  These kinds of people were able to imagine things others couldn't, were able to see past appearances to find nuggets of real underlying value.<br> <br>

The first issue is, what do you want to do?  As someone wrote, if you just want to be a "code monkey," you need about the level of skills of a "shade tree mechanic."  If you want to be considered someone people look up to (and handsomely reward), however, you need to be well-read, especially in abstract thought (history, music theory, etc.).<br> <br>

In my own case, I started in electronics in 1956, learned programmin in 1962-3, and was one of the few people who could both draw a (workable) schematic and write (credible) code.  It gave me a distinct "leg up" over my peers who were limited to one or the other.  I never had the benefit of college/university, but I've taught at several, all because I have been a student all my life.  I'm STILL learning, at 67 years.  Along the way, my reputation was such that I billed myself (before semi-retiring) at more than $2,000/day (back when that was real money!).<br> <br>

The executives who hired me couldn't care if I had a "sheepskin" or three noses.  What they cared about was that I had accumulated 40 years' experience, not two year's experience twenty times over.  That's where most of my peers were:  They were enamored of their homes, their cars, their sports, but they were NOT engaged in permanent, perpetual learning.  Personally, I'm only comfortable when presented with what I perceive as a problem that is 105\% of my self-perceived capacity.<br> <br>

So, focus on how much value you can add to your employer (or client), and build on that.  Take the dirty jobs nobody else wants...and excel at making them outstanding successes.  Heck, in 1963 I was a "programmer's aide," (paid lower than the department's secretary!) and by 1965 I was Chief Programmer in charge of the Beverly Hills office of the (then) world's largest "Contract Programming and Service Bureau" firm.  They didn't care about credentials, they were focused on billable results.<br> <br>

Best of luck, but never rest on your laurels or your diploma(s).  Always seek to excel, aim toward perfection (while unachievable, it's the only target worth aiming at), and understand how your BOSS gets measured, and contribute to THAT.<br> <br>

Personally, when I'm hiring, I'm looking for the right attitude and personal philosophy.  I can teach any high school grad to program, but I can't instill them with a "can do" attitude, a willingness to take on the unpalatable jobs that still need to be done, the unquenchable thrist for learning.  So, I hire for what I need (that attitude), and fill in the blanks over time.<br> <br>

Best of luck!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe , after 53 years in this industry , you 're likely asking the wrong question .
I learned programming BEFORE there were schools of any kind , but my mentors , Bill Orchard-Hays was a mathemetician , and Eli Hellerman had his Bachelor 's in Statistics , and a Masters in Conducting .
Jack Moshman was a world-leading Operation Research Ph.D. These kinds of people were able to imagine things others could n't , were able to see past appearances to find nuggets of real underlying value .
The first issue is , what do you want to do ?
As someone wrote , if you just want to be a " code monkey , " you need about the level of skills of a " shade tree mechanic .
" If you want to be considered someone people look up to ( and handsomely reward ) , however , you need to be well-read , especially in abstract thought ( history , music theory , etc. ) .
In my own case , I started in electronics in 1956 , learned programmin in 1962-3 , and was one of the few people who could both draw a ( workable ) schematic and write ( credible ) code .
It gave me a distinct " leg up " over my peers who were limited to one or the other .
I never had the benefit of college/university , but I 've taught at several , all because I have been a student all my life .
I 'm STILL learning , at 67 years .
Along the way , my reputation was such that I billed myself ( before semi-retiring ) at more than $ 2,000/day ( back when that was real money ! ) .
The executives who hired me could n't care if I had a " sheepskin " or three noses .
What they cared about was that I had accumulated 40 years ' experience , not two year 's experience twenty times over .
That 's where most of my peers were : They were enamored of their homes , their cars , their sports , but they were NOT engaged in permanent , perpetual learning .
Personally , I 'm only comfortable when presented with what I perceive as a problem that is 105 \ % of my self-perceived capacity .
So , focus on how much value you can add to your employer ( or client ) , and build on that .
Take the dirty jobs nobody else wants...and excel at making them outstanding successes .
Heck , in 1963 I was a " programmer 's aide , " ( paid lower than the department 's secretary !
) and by 1965 I was Chief Programmer in charge of the Beverly Hills office of the ( then ) world 's largest " Contract Programming and Service Bureau " firm .
They did n't care about credentials , they were focused on billable results .
Best of luck , but never rest on your laurels or your diploma ( s ) .
Always seek to excel , aim toward perfection ( while unachievable , it 's the only target worth aiming at ) , and understand how your BOSS gets measured , and contribute to THAT .
Personally , when I 'm hiring , I 'm looking for the right attitude and personal philosophy .
I can teach any high school grad to program , but I ca n't instill them with a " can do " attitude , a willingness to take on the unpalatable jobs that still need to be done , the unquenchable thrist for learning .
So , I hire for what I need ( that attitude ) , and fill in the blanks over time .
Best of luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe, after 53 years in this industry, you're likely asking the wrong question.
I learned programming BEFORE there were schools of any kind, but my mentors, Bill Orchard-Hays was a mathemetician, and Eli Hellerman had his Bachelor's in Statistics, and a Masters in Conducting.
Jack Moshman was a world-leading Operation Research Ph.D.  These kinds of people were able to imagine things others couldn't, were able to see past appearances to find nuggets of real underlying value.
The first issue is, what do you want to do?
As someone wrote, if you just want to be a "code monkey," you need about the level of skills of a "shade tree mechanic.
"  If you want to be considered someone people look up to (and handsomely reward), however, you need to be well-read, especially in abstract thought (history, music theory, etc.).
In my own case, I started in electronics in 1956, learned programmin in 1962-3, and was one of the few people who could both draw a (workable) schematic and write (credible) code.
It gave me a distinct "leg up" over my peers who were limited to one or the other.
I never had the benefit of college/university, but I've taught at several, all because I have been a student all my life.
I'm STILL learning, at 67 years.
Along the way, my reputation was such that I billed myself (before semi-retiring) at more than $2,000/day (back when that was real money!).
The executives who hired me couldn't care if I had a "sheepskin" or three noses.
What they cared about was that I had accumulated 40 years' experience, not two year's experience twenty times over.
That's where most of my peers were:  They were enamored of their homes, their cars, their sports, but they were NOT engaged in permanent, perpetual learning.
Personally, I'm only comfortable when presented with what I perceive as a problem that is 105\% of my self-perceived capacity.
So, focus on how much value you can add to your employer (or client), and build on that.
Take the dirty jobs nobody else wants...and excel at making them outstanding successes.
Heck, in 1963 I was a "programmer's aide," (paid lower than the department's secretary!
) and by 1965 I was Chief Programmer in charge of the Beverly Hills office of the (then) world's largest "Contract Programming and Service Bureau" firm.
They didn't care about credentials, they were focused on billable results.
Best of luck, but never rest on your laurels or your diploma(s).
Always seek to excel, aim toward perfection (while unachievable, it's the only target worth aiming at), and understand how your BOSS gets measured, and contribute to THAT.
Personally, when I'm hiring, I'm looking for the right attitude and personal philosophy.
I can teach any high school grad to program, but I can't instill them with a "can do" attitude, a willingness to take on the unpalatable jobs that still need to be done, the unquenchable thrist for learning.
So, I hire for what I need (that attitude), and fill in the blanks over time.
Best of luck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107912</id>
	<title>School structures the modern class system</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The deep and barely hidden purpose of institutionalized schooling is to maintain a class based system. There are the "blue collar" workers(as Americans say) who do not have degrees and are thus locked into lower prestige and paying jobs. Then there are the "white collar" workers who have a degree, can get higher prestige and paying jobs. This is the true function of college and the university and not anything else: to create the modern class system. To get into the truly elevated class(since after all college grads are always as well a few paychecks away from being homeless bums) that in Marxian terms "controls capital with which to make more capital", going to college or not, cannot get you to such a vaulted level. Only hereditary inheritance can get you born into that status, or a chance combination of the right portions of luck, chance, proper connections, social climbing and ruthless greed in business matters. As Illich says in modern schooling the myth is maintained that "everyone has an equal chance to compete for equality," an absurd notion that modern propaganda has made into the common sentiment instead of a disturbing contradiction. This competition among the economic and social classes that are still in the similar situation of being a paycheck or two away from homelessness is what allows the disturbingly and grotesquely rich minority that can afford their own $100 million yachts and luxury Boeing 747's to remain undisturbed.</p><p>You are forced to learn in school new packets of information or knowledge all the time that serve no functional purpose within your life at that moment other than the demand the teacher imposes on you to retain the information at least long enough to be graded on. Those who just do it and get a good grade, only can do so by confirming to the institutional goals which can only exist outside their autonomy, desires and wants; such people are rewarded and promoted in school(pre-workforce). The higher prestige university you attend and higher grades you can get, the higher prestige job you can command upon graduation -- within its limits in the workforce. If a mouse is placed in a cardboard maze during an experiment and the mouse finds its way to a piece of cheese, can that mouse be compared with a wholly different type of mouse that realizing its situation chews through the cardboard when the experimenter is not on guard and escapes? As far as the hydraic institution of school is concerned, mice are meant to run around mazes to amuse experimenters through their mutual but useless competition. Thus in school whole generations are conditioned to conflate success with working against their self-desire and autonomy, a true battle against oneself to conform to the malicious modern social body and organization that only exists for profit motives or the motive of infinite institutional expansionism(since all corporations wish to grow as big as possible, all governments the same, and all organizations wish to be more successful and expansive). Modern success is the success of pleasing your teacher, who himself is a mere lose-able pawn deep in some labyrinth bureaucracy, who can only teach what curriculum stipulates he teach. Modern "success" is the success of pleasing your boss and company for a comparative trifle in monetary compensation compared to any large stockholder or President, Vice-President, CEO, etc. This is merely the "success" of working against your deep self-interests for self-defeating and paltry rewards possible only after humiliating yourself before the current social order as an obedient lackey of indifferent corporations -- the only social position left any longer for modern man.</p><p>Recommended reading:<br>Illich, Ivan. <a href="http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/Deschooling/intro.html" title="preservenet.com" rel="nofollow">Deschooling Society.</a> [preservenet.com]<br>Gatto, John Taylor. <a href="http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm" title="johntaylorgatto.com" rel="nofollow">The Underground History of American Education.</a> [johntaylorgatto.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The deep and barely hidden purpose of institutionalized schooling is to maintain a class based system .
There are the " blue collar " workers ( as Americans say ) who do not have degrees and are thus locked into lower prestige and paying jobs .
Then there are the " white collar " workers who have a degree , can get higher prestige and paying jobs .
This is the true function of college and the university and not anything else : to create the modern class system .
To get into the truly elevated class ( since after all college grads are always as well a few paychecks away from being homeless bums ) that in Marxian terms " controls capital with which to make more capital " , going to college or not , can not get you to such a vaulted level .
Only hereditary inheritance can get you born into that status , or a chance combination of the right portions of luck , chance , proper connections , social climbing and ruthless greed in business matters .
As Illich says in modern schooling the myth is maintained that " everyone has an equal chance to compete for equality , " an absurd notion that modern propaganda has made into the common sentiment instead of a disturbing contradiction .
This competition among the economic and social classes that are still in the similar situation of being a paycheck or two away from homelessness is what allows the disturbingly and grotesquely rich minority that can afford their own $ 100 million yachts and luxury Boeing 747 's to remain undisturbed.You are forced to learn in school new packets of information or knowledge all the time that serve no functional purpose within your life at that moment other than the demand the teacher imposes on you to retain the information at least long enough to be graded on .
Those who just do it and get a good grade , only can do so by confirming to the institutional goals which can only exist outside their autonomy , desires and wants ; such people are rewarded and promoted in school ( pre-workforce ) .
The higher prestige university you attend and higher grades you can get , the higher prestige job you can command upon graduation -- within its limits in the workforce .
If a mouse is placed in a cardboard maze during an experiment and the mouse finds its way to a piece of cheese , can that mouse be compared with a wholly different type of mouse that realizing its situation chews through the cardboard when the experimenter is not on guard and escapes ?
As far as the hydraic institution of school is concerned , mice are meant to run around mazes to amuse experimenters through their mutual but useless competition .
Thus in school whole generations are conditioned to conflate success with working against their self-desire and autonomy , a true battle against oneself to conform to the malicious modern social body and organization that only exists for profit motives or the motive of infinite institutional expansionism ( since all corporations wish to grow as big as possible , all governments the same , and all organizations wish to be more successful and expansive ) .
Modern success is the success of pleasing your teacher , who himself is a mere lose-able pawn deep in some labyrinth bureaucracy , who can only teach what curriculum stipulates he teach .
Modern " success " is the success of pleasing your boss and company for a comparative trifle in monetary compensation compared to any large stockholder or President , Vice-President , CEO , etc .
This is merely the " success " of working against your deep self-interests for self-defeating and paltry rewards possible only after humiliating yourself before the current social order as an obedient lackey of indifferent corporations -- the only social position left any longer for modern man.Recommended reading : Illich , Ivan .
Deschooling Society .
[ preservenet.com ] Gatto , John Taylor .
The Underground History of American Education .
[ johntaylorgatto.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The deep and barely hidden purpose of institutionalized schooling is to maintain a class based system.
There are the "blue collar" workers(as Americans say) who do not have degrees and are thus locked into lower prestige and paying jobs.
Then there are the "white collar" workers who have a degree, can get higher prestige and paying jobs.
This is the true function of college and the university and not anything else: to create the modern class system.
To get into the truly elevated class(since after all college grads are always as well a few paychecks away from being homeless bums) that in Marxian terms "controls capital with which to make more capital", going to college or not, cannot get you to such a vaulted level.
Only hereditary inheritance can get you born into that status, or a chance combination of the right portions of luck, chance, proper connections, social climbing and ruthless greed in business matters.
As Illich says in modern schooling the myth is maintained that "everyone has an equal chance to compete for equality," an absurd notion that modern propaganda has made into the common sentiment instead of a disturbing contradiction.
This competition among the economic and social classes that are still in the similar situation of being a paycheck or two away from homelessness is what allows the disturbingly and grotesquely rich minority that can afford their own $100 million yachts and luxury Boeing 747's to remain undisturbed.You are forced to learn in school new packets of information or knowledge all the time that serve no functional purpose within your life at that moment other than the demand the teacher imposes on you to retain the information at least long enough to be graded on.
Those who just do it and get a good grade, only can do so by confirming to the institutional goals which can only exist outside their autonomy, desires and wants; such people are rewarded and promoted in school(pre-workforce).
The higher prestige university you attend and higher grades you can get, the higher prestige job you can command upon graduation -- within its limits in the workforce.
If a mouse is placed in a cardboard maze during an experiment and the mouse finds its way to a piece of cheese, can that mouse be compared with a wholly different type of mouse that realizing its situation chews through the cardboard when the experimenter is not on guard and escapes?
As far as the hydraic institution of school is concerned, mice are meant to run around mazes to amuse experimenters through their mutual but useless competition.
Thus in school whole generations are conditioned to conflate success with working against their self-desire and autonomy, a true battle against oneself to conform to the malicious modern social body and organization that only exists for profit motives or the motive of infinite institutional expansionism(since all corporations wish to grow as big as possible, all governments the same, and all organizations wish to be more successful and expansive).
Modern success is the success of pleasing your teacher, who himself is a mere lose-able pawn deep in some labyrinth bureaucracy, who can only teach what curriculum stipulates he teach.
Modern "success" is the success of pleasing your boss and company for a comparative trifle in monetary compensation compared to any large stockholder or President, Vice-President, CEO, etc.
This is merely the "success" of working against your deep self-interests for self-defeating and paltry rewards possible only after humiliating yourself before the current social order as an obedient lackey of indifferent corporations -- the only social position left any longer for modern man.Recommended reading:Illich, Ivan.
Deschooling Society.
[preservenet.com]Gatto, John Taylor.
The Underground History of American Education.
[johntaylorgatto.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110052</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>narcberry</author>
	<datestamp>1258288200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I just needed coding monkeys, vocational school is a perfect fit (unfortunately for the "grad" so is google most times).</p><p>If I need workers that can design, code, communicate, conjugate, add, or apply lessons from different fields of science and arts; I'll want someone with more qualifications.</p><p>Of course, this begs the question. If there is a stigma in this field that a 4 year degree is required for success, why would a potential employee go to a vocational school instead? Maybe, just maybe, the burden of responsibility is already appropriately assigned; on whomever seeks success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I just needed coding monkeys , vocational school is a perfect fit ( unfortunately for the " grad " so is google most times ) .If I need workers that can design , code , communicate , conjugate , add , or apply lessons from different fields of science and arts ; I 'll want someone with more qualifications.Of course , this begs the question .
If there is a stigma in this field that a 4 year degree is required for success , why would a potential employee go to a vocational school instead ?
Maybe , just maybe , the burden of responsibility is already appropriately assigned ; on whomever seeks success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I just needed coding monkeys, vocational school is a perfect fit (unfortunately for the "grad" so is google most times).If I need workers that can design, code, communicate, conjugate, add, or apply lessons from different fields of science and arts; I'll want someone with more qualifications.Of course, this begs the question.
If there is a stigma in this field that a 4 year degree is required for success, why would a potential employee go to a vocational school instead?
Maybe, just maybe, the burden of responsibility is already appropriately assigned; on whomever seeks success.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109850</id>
	<title>Re:Perseverance</title>
	<author>nidarus</author>
	<datestamp>1258286700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it doesn't. You're just repeating a common prejudice.</p><p>Compare someone who has lots of real-world experience, with real-world requirements and real-world, 60 hour weeks, with someone who coasted through college getting a degree s/he doesn't care about because mommy said that you need a degree no matter what.</p><p>I know both kinds. Guess who's the better programmer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it does n't .
You 're just repeating a common prejudice.Compare someone who has lots of real-world experience , with real-world requirements and real-world , 60 hour weeks , with someone who coasted through college getting a degree s/he does n't care about because mommy said that you need a degree no matter what.I know both kinds .
Guess who 's the better programmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it doesn't.
You're just repeating a common prejudice.Compare someone who has lots of real-world experience, with real-world requirements and real-world, 60 hour weeks, with someone who coasted through college getting a degree s/he doesn't care about because mommy said that you need a degree no matter what.I know both kinds.
Guess who's the better programmer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111294</id>
	<title>haha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258299600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it kind of funny that Spigel makes this argument since he himself studied information science, not computer science.</p><p>(I'm  an undergrad at the University of Pittsburgh, which is where he did his B.S.)</p><p>It's nothing like a CS major. All the courses are practical in nature - a class on databases, class on human factors, a class on telecommunications/networking. You do a concentration like Security or User Centered design. You do NOT take anything above Algerbra. (Whereas the CS dept requires calc 1, calc 2, and linear algerbra)</p><p>It's pretty much the happy medium between CS and no degree, and is by no means an engineering degree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it kind of funny that Spigel makes this argument since he himself studied information science , not computer science .
( I 'm an undergrad at the University of Pittsburgh , which is where he did his B.S .
) It 's nothing like a CS major .
All the courses are practical in nature - a class on databases , class on human factors , a class on telecommunications/networking .
You do a concentration like Security or User Centered design .
You do NOT take anything above Algerbra .
( Whereas the CS dept requires calc 1 , calc 2 , and linear algerbra ) It 's pretty much the happy medium between CS and no degree , and is by no means an engineering degree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it kind of funny that Spigel makes this argument since he himself studied information science, not computer science.
(I'm  an undergrad at the University of Pittsburgh, which is where he did his B.S.
)It's nothing like a CS major.
All the courses are practical in nature - a class on databases, class on human factors, a class on telecommunications/networking.
You do a concentration like Security or User Centered design.
You do NOT take anything above Algerbra.
(Whereas the CS dept requires calc 1, calc 2, and linear algerbra)It's pretty much the happy medium between CS and no degree, and is by no means an engineering degree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30124440</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258379640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I say there's actually some merit in these "flame war" conversations from time to time. It gives insight into all those types you specified and more, which helps us analytical types know how people think. That in turn might come in helpful in persuading an interviewer/team lead of a certain type to hire me for a job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I say there 's actually some merit in these " flame war " conversations from time to time .
It gives insight into all those types you specified and more , which helps us analytical types know how people think .
That in turn might come in helpful in persuading an interviewer/team lead of a certain type to hire me for a job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say there's actually some merit in these "flame war" conversations from time to time.
It gives insight into all those types you specified and more, which helps us analytical types know how people think.
That in turn might come in helpful in persuading an interviewer/team lead of a certain type to hire me for a job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</id>
	<title>Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the kind of story that will bring out the worst in Slashdot. It has it all:</p><ul> <li>provocation for pragmatic and the elegant schools of programming</li><li>bringing the know-nothing anti-intellectuals out of the woodwork (Durr! I just need to know dem PHP!)</li><li>bringing all the hyper-sensitive academics out of the woodwork (E Gahds! I can't let the PHP guy go uncorrected! *typetypetype*)</li><li>inflaming emotions over an issue that can't possibly be resolved objectively</li><li>a complete lack of substantive merit; nobody will walk away smarter</li><li>setting up a divisive us-versus-them mentality that's practically purpose-built for flamewars</li></ul><p>Slashdot, what the hell happened to you? You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack. You've really let yourself go. I don't think I can do this anymore. It's hard to say, but I don't love you anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the kind of story that will bring out the worst in Slashdot .
It has it all : provocation for pragmatic and the elegant schools of programmingbringing the know-nothing anti-intellectuals out of the woodwork ( Durr !
I just need to know dem PHP !
) bringing all the hyper-sensitive academics out of the woodwork ( E Gahds !
I ca n't let the PHP guy go uncorrected !
* typetypetype * ) inflaming emotions over an issue that ca n't possibly be resolved objectivelya complete lack of substantive merit ; nobody will walk away smartersetting up a divisive us-versus-them mentality that 's practically purpose-built for flamewarsSlashdot , what the hell happened to you ?
You used to be interesting and hot , but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack .
You 've really let yourself go .
I do n't think I can do this anymore .
It 's hard to say , but I do n't love you anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the kind of story that will bring out the worst in Slashdot.
It has it all: provocation for pragmatic and the elegant schools of programmingbringing the know-nothing anti-intellectuals out of the woodwork (Durr!
I just need to know dem PHP!
)bringing all the hyper-sensitive academics out of the woodwork (E Gahds!
I can't let the PHP guy go uncorrected!
*typetypetype*)inflaming emotions over an issue that can't possibly be resolved objectivelya complete lack of substantive merit; nobody will walk away smartersetting up a divisive us-versus-them mentality that's practically purpose-built for flamewarsSlashdot, what the hell happened to you?
You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack.
You've really let yourself go.
I don't think I can do this anymore.
It's hard to say, but I don't love you anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112602</id>
	<title>Developing a skill, getting paid another</title>
	<author>Device666</author>
	<datestamp>1258314900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A developer should develop programs in an optimal manner and produce results according to given specifications. No one really cares it is done with academic skills or not, as long given specifications are met.  Academics are often specialists. Non-academics are often better generalists, apply where seems fit. Where academics are more profitable there is a higher demand for academics, if supply is smaller than demand: higher paycheck.

Advancement of developer skills don't connote advancement of wealth, political skills do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A developer should develop programs in an optimal manner and produce results according to given specifications .
No one really cares it is done with academic skills or not , as long given specifications are met .
Academics are often specialists .
Non-academics are often better generalists , apply where seems fit .
Where academics are more profitable there is a higher demand for academics , if supply is smaller than demand : higher paycheck .
Advancement of developer skills do n't connote advancement of wealth , political skills do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A developer should develop programs in an optimal manner and produce results according to given specifications.
No one really cares it is done with academic skills or not, as long given specifications are met.
Academics are often specialists.
Non-academics are often better generalists, apply where seems fit.
Where academics are more profitable there is a higher demand for academics, if supply is smaller than demand: higher paycheck.
Advancement of developer skills don't connote advancement of wealth, political skills do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107322</id>
	<title>Why they make a difference?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design. Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect, but it's not something that happens by itself. In most lines of work you'll often end up with people doing it some weird way because they've never learned that sort of thing, you can see it in computers too with people that never learned any design patterns and decided to invent their own - mostly poorly. Sure, proven experience beats all but if I was choosing between someone that's learned the theory and has a little experience versus someone that's been busy writing low level procedures all that time it'd be a tough call. If I could have both I'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it. Code can be "ugly but works" and it's not really important, people don't touch it much unless they're changing functionality. There's no such as "ugly but works" design, then it IS an ugly design that'll come back to haunt you again and again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design .
Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect , but it 's not something that happens by itself .
In most lines of work you 'll often end up with people doing it some weird way because they 've never learned that sort of thing , you can see it in computers too with people that never learned any design patterns and decided to invent their own - mostly poorly .
Sure , proven experience beats all but if I was choosing between someone that 's learned the theory and has a little experience versus someone that 's been busy writing low level procedures all that time it 'd be a tough call .
If I could have both I 'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it .
Code can be " ugly but works " and it 's not really important , people do n't touch it much unless they 're changing functionality .
There 's no such as " ugly but works " design , then it IS an ugly design that 'll come back to haunt you again and again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design.
Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect, but it's not something that happens by itself.
In most lines of work you'll often end up with people doing it some weird way because they've never learned that sort of thing, you can see it in computers too with people that never learned any design patterns and decided to invent their own - mostly poorly.
Sure, proven experience beats all but if I was choosing between someone that's learned the theory and has a little experience versus someone that's been busy writing low level procedures all that time it'd be a tough call.
If I could have both I'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it.
Code can be "ugly but works" and it's not really important, people don't touch it much unless they're changing functionality.
There's no such as "ugly but works" design, then it IS an ugly design that'll come back to haunt you again and again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332</id>
	<title>Important difference</title>
	<author>MSesow</author>
	<datestamp>1258313940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the difference in the words "developer" and "coder" are important to any argument made - If all you need is someone who's job is only to write code, then yeah, a coder is a coder.  However, if you need someone who is familiar with algorithms, theory, life cycle management, requirements engineering, etc., then you probably would want someone with a four year degree.  Granted, even then there is no promise that the person knows more if they are a coder/degree holder, but generally the person looking at a stack of resumes will see that one extra accomplishment, and it very well might make their decision that much easier.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the difference in the words " developer " and " coder " are important to any argument made - If all you need is someone who 's job is only to write code , then yeah , a coder is a coder .
However , if you need someone who is familiar with algorithms , theory , life cycle management , requirements engineering , etc. , then you probably would want someone with a four year degree .
Granted , even then there is no promise that the person knows more if they are a coder/degree holder , but generally the person looking at a stack of resumes will see that one extra accomplishment , and it very well might make their decision that much easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the difference in the words "developer" and "coder" are important to any argument made - If all you need is someone who's job is only to write code, then yeah, a coder is a coder.
However, if you need someone who is familiar with algorithms, theory, life cycle management, requirements engineering, etc., then you probably would want someone with a four year degree.
Granted, even then there is no promise that the person knows more if they are a coder/degree holder, but generally the person looking at a stack of resumes will see that one extra accomplishment, and it very well might make their decision that much easier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109206</id>
	<title>A different twist</title>
	<author>swamp boy</author>
	<datestamp>1258282020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience, whether one is treated like "blue collar" or "white collar" has more to do with the culture of the organization and less to do with whether the developer has a certain degree or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , whether one is treated like " blue collar " or " white collar " has more to do with the culture of the organization and less to do with whether the developer has a certain degree or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, whether one is treated like "blue collar" or "white collar" has more to do with the culture of the organization and less to do with whether the developer has a certain degree or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110834</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Xyrus</author>
	<datestamp>1258294800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or in other words, if we want to see this kind of crap we can just watch Glen Beck.</p><p>~X~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or in other words , if we want to see this kind of crap we can just watch Glen Beck. ~ X ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or in other words, if we want to see this kind of crap we can just watch Glen Beck.~X~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109114</id>
	<title>Seems simple to me</title>
	<author>njfuzzy</author>
	<datestamp>1258281300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm neither, but here's how I see it: Someone who went to a vocational school will be very good at doing one thing. However, an employer will probably prefer someone who is good at more than one thing, and able to adapt to new roles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm neither , but here 's how I see it : Someone who went to a vocational school will be very good at doing one thing .
However , an employer will probably prefer someone who is good at more than one thing , and able to adapt to new roles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm neither, but here's how I see it: Someone who went to a vocational school will be very good at doing one thing.
However, an employer will probably prefer someone who is good at more than one thing, and able to adapt to new roles.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107356</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1258314060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sentence is badly constructed anyway.  My brain hurt reading it.  The spelling mistake at the end was just icing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sentence is badly constructed anyway .
My brain hurt reading it .
The spelling mistake at the end was just icing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sentence is badly constructed anyway.
My brain hurt reading it.
The spelling mistake at the end was just icing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107572</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1258315260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In general, I'd rather work with a person who has the knowledge but had to work it out for themselves than someone who memorized it in school<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... all else being equal, they will usually have a deeper understanding of the knowledge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In general , I 'd rather work with a person who has the knowledge but had to work it out for themselves than someone who memorized it in school ... all else being equal , they will usually have a deeper understanding of the knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In general, I'd rather work with a person who has the knowledge but had to work it out for themselves than someone who memorized it in school ... all else being equal, they will usually have a deeper understanding of the knowledge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107678</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How does one "queue" awkward silence?</p></div> </blockquote><p>You tell it to get in line behind nervous ball-scratching and red face.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does one " queue " awkward silence ?
You tell it to get in line behind nervous ball-scratching and red face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does one "queue" awkward silence?
You tell it to get in line behind nervous ball-scratching and red face.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108984</id>
	<title>Why not use the same logic for all professions?</title>
	<author>walterbyrd</author>
	<datestamp>1258280220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Historically, it has not been all that long that formal credentials have been required for physicians, nurses, lawyers, engineers, accountants, teachers, scientists, architects, etc.</p><p>I'll bet that when degrees were first required, for any of those professions, the self trained in those professions were screaming and crying about how they don't need a piece of paper to prove anything, and about how those with formal credentials often had inferior skills.</p><p>If software developers don't need formal credentials, then why does anybody else? Why not do away with requirements for all formal training of any kind? Instead, when you go to a new doctor, you can give him, or her, a technical interview. Wouldn't that make more sense?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Historically , it has not been all that long that formal credentials have been required for physicians , nurses , lawyers , engineers , accountants , teachers , scientists , architects , etc.I 'll bet that when degrees were first required , for any of those professions , the self trained in those professions were screaming and crying about how they do n't need a piece of paper to prove anything , and about how those with formal credentials often had inferior skills.If software developers do n't need formal credentials , then why does anybody else ?
Why not do away with requirements for all formal training of any kind ?
Instead , when you go to a new doctor , you can give him , or her , a technical interview .
Would n't that make more sense ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Historically, it has not been all that long that formal credentials have been required for physicians, nurses, lawyers, engineers, accountants, teachers, scientists, architects, etc.I'll bet that when degrees were first required, for any of those professions, the self trained in those professions were screaming and crying about how they don't need a piece of paper to prove anything, and about how those with formal credentials often had inferior skills.If software developers don't need formal credentials, then why does anybody else?
Why not do away with requirements for all formal training of any kind?
Instead, when you go to a new doctor, you can give him, or her, a technical interview.
Wouldn't that make more sense?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112702</id>
	<title>I think degrees are worth something...</title>
	<author>seebs</author>
	<datestamp>1258402440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interestingly... I have one.  But it's not in computer science.  In fact, for a variety of reasons, it turns out that I have never taken a single computer science course in my life.  Instead, I ended up with a degree in psychology.</p><p>This is not all bad.  Here's the thing:  In the real world, nothing is all that specialized.  So, ability to handle a diverse set of kinds of problems is more useful than specialized training -- especially since, roughly 18-19 years after I graduated, any training I could have had back then would probably be only marginally relevant now.  Learning to do research, learning to handle more kinds of input... Those have paid off a lot.</p><p>So I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable to think that people who have a particular background (say, a couple more years of school) might typically perform better.  I don't know whether it's actually degrees that lead to the difference, or whether it's the difference in skills and experience.  Certainly, of the classes I took in college, the ones that have been most useful to me from a career standpoint have mostly been in the social sciences.  I learned a lot about interacting with people from a class on persuasion.  I learned how to do effective research primarily from a class on Arthurian legends, of all things.  In short, the classes that have been having the most effect on how I can get things done have not been the classes you might think would be relevant to what I do for a living now.  (Except that the writing classes have paid off a fair bit for, well, writing.)</p><p>So, basically... For a lot of careers, I think a vocational school degree is certainly plenty to do the job, as is just happening to know how to do it, but in many cases, I think a broader education will have a big payoff in real ability to get things done, whether or not HR departments care.  (And given that I'm mostly employable, it turns out that after you have 10-15 years of experience, no one really cares what your degree was in.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly... I have one .
But it 's not in computer science .
In fact , for a variety of reasons , it turns out that I have never taken a single computer science course in my life .
Instead , I ended up with a degree in psychology.This is not all bad .
Here 's the thing : In the real world , nothing is all that specialized .
So , ability to handle a diverse set of kinds of problems is more useful than specialized training -- especially since , roughly 18-19 years after I graduated , any training I could have had back then would probably be only marginally relevant now .
Learning to do research , learning to handle more kinds of input... Those have paid off a lot.So I do n't think it 's necessarily unreasonable to think that people who have a particular background ( say , a couple more years of school ) might typically perform better .
I do n't know whether it 's actually degrees that lead to the difference , or whether it 's the difference in skills and experience .
Certainly , of the classes I took in college , the ones that have been most useful to me from a career standpoint have mostly been in the social sciences .
I learned a lot about interacting with people from a class on persuasion .
I learned how to do effective research primarily from a class on Arthurian legends , of all things .
In short , the classes that have been having the most effect on how I can get things done have not been the classes you might think would be relevant to what I do for a living now .
( Except that the writing classes have paid off a fair bit for , well , writing .
) So , basically... For a lot of careers , I think a vocational school degree is certainly plenty to do the job , as is just happening to know how to do it , but in many cases , I think a broader education will have a big payoff in real ability to get things done , whether or not HR departments care .
( And given that I 'm mostly employable , it turns out that after you have 10-15 years of experience , no one really cares what your degree was in .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly... I have one.
But it's not in computer science.
In fact, for a variety of reasons, it turns out that I have never taken a single computer science course in my life.
Instead, I ended up with a degree in psychology.This is not all bad.
Here's the thing:  In the real world, nothing is all that specialized.
So, ability to handle a diverse set of kinds of problems is more useful than specialized training -- especially since, roughly 18-19 years after I graduated, any training I could have had back then would probably be only marginally relevant now.
Learning to do research, learning to handle more kinds of input... Those have paid off a lot.So I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable to think that people who have a particular background (say, a couple more years of school) might typically perform better.
I don't know whether it's actually degrees that lead to the difference, or whether it's the difference in skills and experience.
Certainly, of the classes I took in college, the ones that have been most useful to me from a career standpoint have mostly been in the social sciences.
I learned a lot about interacting with people from a class on persuasion.
I learned how to do effective research primarily from a class on Arthurian legends, of all things.
In short, the classes that have been having the most effect on how I can get things done have not been the classes you might think would be relevant to what I do for a living now.
(Except that the writing classes have paid off a fair bit for, well, writing.
)So, basically... For a lot of careers, I think a vocational school degree is certainly plenty to do the job, as is just happening to know how to do it, but in many cases, I think a broader education will have a big payoff in real ability to get things done, whether or not HR departments care.
(And given that I'm mostly employable, it turns out that after you have 10-15 years of experience, no one really cares what your degree was in.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109420</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Homburg</author>
	<datestamp>1258283640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Here in the UK, when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only.</p></div><p>That's true in England and Wales, but not entirely true of Scotland, where the undergraduate degree typically takes four years and includes some subjects outside of your primary field (although I don't think the Scottish universities have the same kind of breadth requirements you get in the US). I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Scottish system (along with the German system) was an influence on the development of US universities.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here in the UK , when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only.That 's true in England and Wales , but not entirely true of Scotland , where the undergraduate degree typically takes four years and includes some subjects outside of your primary field ( although I do n't think the Scottish universities have the same kind of breadth requirements you get in the US ) .
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Scottish system ( along with the German system ) was an influence on the development of US universities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here in the UK, when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only.That's true in England and Wales, but not entirely true of Scotland, where the undergraduate degree typically takes four years and includes some subjects outside of your primary field (although I don't think the Scottish universities have the same kind of breadth requirements you get in the US).
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Scottish system (along with the German system) was an influence on the development of US universities.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30119556</id>
	<title>My father once told me..</title>
	<author>Sanityklaws</author>
	<datestamp>1258402260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it was more desireable to hire programmers/developers with a 4 year degree because of a demonstrated desire and ability to learn.</p><p>In a profession where learning is constant, these are important traits.  The key word here is demonstrated.  Hiring people is mostly blind, so you go with those that have completed the task.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it was more desireable to hire programmers/developers with a 4 year degree because of a demonstrated desire and ability to learn.In a profession where learning is constant , these are important traits .
The key word here is demonstrated .
Hiring people is mostly blind , so you go with those that have completed the task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it was more desireable to hire programmers/developers with a 4 year degree because of a demonstrated desire and ability to learn.In a profession where learning is constant, these are important traits.
The key word here is demonstrated.
Hiring people is mostly blind, so you go with those that have completed the task.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115798</id>
	<title>A Problem of Business Intruding</title>
	<author>ShadoeKnight</author>
	<datestamp>1258388940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think employers are really trying to be negative towards programmers with 2 year Associate Degrees or some college and work experience. I think it has a lot more to do with finding a "quick and dirty" measure they can use so the hiring process isn't quite so expensive. Every interview is a chunk of time the interviewer is not being productive for the company. Every test requires devising which eats up a developer's time. If they target 4 year degrees they can be reasonably assured that a potential employee has at least seen the types of programming and logic that may be required in the job. This isn't always a good measure and can seriously cost the company when they accidentally hire the idiot who cheated his way through, but its better than taking a shot in the dark.

I should close by saying I fall into the "some college and work experience" group, so I've seen the sometimes infuriating practice of hiring the guys with the 4 year degrees over the ones who have experience doing the job. I never quite finished my 4 year degree because I didn't really care about the electronics behind the operation of the computer. I just wanted to design and build software. Even after 9 years of doing exactly that the stigma can still rear its head on job searches. Not all of us wanted to be Computer Scientists some of us just want to design and/or build software, but only a few colleges have a degree program that allows that kind of thing. They assume if you don't want to be a full fledged Computer Scientist you want to just be a code monkey and that isn't the case. The educators need to realize that software development is getting less and less tied to the hardware and is a separate and wholly different field these days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think employers are really trying to be negative towards programmers with 2 year Associate Degrees or some college and work experience .
I think it has a lot more to do with finding a " quick and dirty " measure they can use so the hiring process is n't quite so expensive .
Every interview is a chunk of time the interviewer is not being productive for the company .
Every test requires devising which eats up a developer 's time .
If they target 4 year degrees they can be reasonably assured that a potential employee has at least seen the types of programming and logic that may be required in the job .
This is n't always a good measure and can seriously cost the company when they accidentally hire the idiot who cheated his way through , but its better than taking a shot in the dark .
I should close by saying I fall into the " some college and work experience " group , so I 've seen the sometimes infuriating practice of hiring the guys with the 4 year degrees over the ones who have experience doing the job .
I never quite finished my 4 year degree because I did n't really care about the electronics behind the operation of the computer .
I just wanted to design and build software .
Even after 9 years of doing exactly that the stigma can still rear its head on job searches .
Not all of us wanted to be Computer Scientists some of us just want to design and/or build software , but only a few colleges have a degree program that allows that kind of thing .
They assume if you do n't want to be a full fledged Computer Scientist you want to just be a code monkey and that is n't the case .
The educators need to realize that software development is getting less and less tied to the hardware and is a separate and wholly different field these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think employers are really trying to be negative towards programmers with 2 year Associate Degrees or some college and work experience.
I think it has a lot more to do with finding a "quick and dirty" measure they can use so the hiring process isn't quite so expensive.
Every interview is a chunk of time the interviewer is not being productive for the company.
Every test requires devising which eats up a developer's time.
If they target 4 year degrees they can be reasonably assured that a potential employee has at least seen the types of programming and logic that may be required in the job.
This isn't always a good measure and can seriously cost the company when they accidentally hire the idiot who cheated his way through, but its better than taking a shot in the dark.
I should close by saying I fall into the "some college and work experience" group, so I've seen the sometimes infuriating practice of hiring the guys with the 4 year degrees over the ones who have experience doing the job.
I never quite finished my 4 year degree because I didn't really care about the electronics behind the operation of the computer.
I just wanted to design and build software.
Even after 9 years of doing exactly that the stigma can still rear its head on job searches.
Not all of us wanted to be Computer Scientists some of us just want to design and/or build software, but only a few colleges have a degree program that allows that kind of thing.
They assume if you don't want to be a full fledged Computer Scientist you want to just be a code monkey and that isn't the case.
The educators need to realize that software development is getting less and less tied to the hardware and is a separate and wholly different field these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112240</id>
	<title>Nobody can be trained to be a great programmer</title>
	<author>RandCraw</author>
	<datestamp>1258309680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No degree or college or professor or course can make you great programmer.  All great coders are self-made -- they learn by reading the code of the best programmers they know and then write the best code they can.  Training is irrelevant.</p><p>Of course, this is true of all great people, not just programmers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No degree or college or professor or course can make you great programmer .
All great coders are self-made -- they learn by reading the code of the best programmers they know and then write the best code they can .
Training is irrelevant.Of course , this is true of all great people , not just programmers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No degree or college or professor or course can make you great programmer.
All great coders are self-made -- they learn by reading the code of the best programmers they know and then write the best code they can.
Training is irrelevant.Of course, this is true of all great people, not just programmers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108938</id>
	<title>False Dichotomy</title>
	<author>BountyX</author>
	<datestamp>1258279920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blue collar vs White collar is a false dichotomy. Yes a four-year college can provide you with connections and other advantages; however, the only thing that matters in the end is your persistence in continuing to challenge yourself and improve your knowledge and intelligence. You must never stop learning. Don't worry people make exceptions for talent, since talent itself is exceptional. If a university is more efficient for you, then get a 4-year degree. If you find university inefficient, or slow then learn yourself, just strive to be ahead of your competition and understand the factors you will be missing/gaining. Value what you have learned and know that you will never stop. Value education, knowledge and the challenges it brings. Your education is about you. A degree means nothing to you, it is worthless. In fact, a degree is for others...what does that have to do with your unquenched constant thirst for challenge and knowledge? Nothing. Do not think of universities and colleges as degree granting institutions, but instead think of them as a place where you can share and exchange knowledge freely. Your education is what you make it. How you want to get there is up to you. Once you value education at the most fundamental level, I promise there is no degree or lack of degree that will stop your success. Proof is in history and our very nature as humans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blue collar vs White collar is a false dichotomy .
Yes a four-year college can provide you with connections and other advantages ; however , the only thing that matters in the end is your persistence in continuing to challenge yourself and improve your knowledge and intelligence .
You must never stop learning .
Do n't worry people make exceptions for talent , since talent itself is exceptional .
If a university is more efficient for you , then get a 4-year degree .
If you find university inefficient , or slow then learn yourself , just strive to be ahead of your competition and understand the factors you will be missing/gaining .
Value what you have learned and know that you will never stop .
Value education , knowledge and the challenges it brings .
Your education is about you .
A degree means nothing to you , it is worthless .
In fact , a degree is for others...what does that have to do with your unquenched constant thirst for challenge and knowledge ?
Nothing. Do not think of universities and colleges as degree granting institutions , but instead think of them as a place where you can share and exchange knowledge freely .
Your education is what you make it .
How you want to get there is up to you .
Once you value education at the most fundamental level , I promise there is no degree or lack of degree that will stop your success .
Proof is in history and our very nature as humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blue collar vs White collar is a false dichotomy.
Yes a four-year college can provide you with connections and other advantages; however, the only thing that matters in the end is your persistence in continuing to challenge yourself and improve your knowledge and intelligence.
You must never stop learning.
Don't worry people make exceptions for talent, since talent itself is exceptional.
If a university is more efficient for you, then get a 4-year degree.
If you find university inefficient, or slow then learn yourself, just strive to be ahead of your competition and understand the factors you will be missing/gaining.
Value what you have learned and know that you will never stop.
Value education, knowledge and the challenges it brings.
Your education is about you.
A degree means nothing to you, it is worthless.
In fact, a degree is for others...what does that have to do with your unquenched constant thirst for challenge and knowledge?
Nothing. Do not think of universities and colleges as degree granting institutions, but instead think of them as a place where you can share and exchange knowledge freely.
Your education is what you make it.
How you want to get there is up to you.
Once you value education at the most fundamental level, I promise there is no degree or lack of degree that will stop your success.
Proof is in history and our very nature as humans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30118166</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1258398060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees, but then while we're at it maybe I could get a pony too..</p></div><p>Several schools have a 4-year Software Engineering degree, and more pop up every year. Ex.: <a href="http://www.se.rit.edu/" title="rit.edu">http://www.se.rit.edu/</a> [rit.edu]</p><p>You can go back to hoping for that pony now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees , but then while we 're at it maybe I could get a pony too..Several schools have a 4-year Software Engineering degree , and more pop up every year .
Ex. : http : //www.se.rit.edu/ [ rit.edu ] You can go back to hoping for that pony now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees, but then while we're at it maybe I could get a pony too..Several schools have a 4-year Software Engineering degree, and more pop up every year.
Ex.: http://www.se.rit.edu/ [rit.edu]You can go back to hoping for that pony now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30121320</id>
	<title>Surely we can be broader minded than this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258365420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The entire tone of this discussion and the article is disconcerting.  Although Mr. Spiegel does make a point to state that the cross section of skills and backgrounds was a major asset to having a good team of people at the end of his article, which  I am pleased to see as I think that's ultimately the major point.</p><p>It is a rude, arrogant and fundamental mistake to classify one's point of origin in terms of how they got to their position training wise as more significant than what they bring to the table in the current state of affairs.</p><p>Working internationally, I worked in a team of people where we had as the three senior personnel significantly diverse backgrounds.</p><p>One of us was an in the trenches, hands on education for their exceptional technical abilities.  They had studied independently and learned on the job perpetually.</p><p>Another of us, was from a pure educational background originally with sporadic in the field access, having both a university degree and a post graduate technical diploma in technology.</p><p>The third came from a blend of business and technical training with some educational basis and some in the field training.</p><p>What we discovered quickly was the reason we were very good as a unit was the express reason that we tackled the problems from different vantage points.  Despite having some truly unique, problematic and specific cases to analyze and solve for our clients given our work environment, we rarely hit a problem we couldn't as a team resolve, be it technical, technological, interpersonal (and any tech that doesn't think people are there problem is uneducated in a whole other sense...) or financial.</p><p>We all had strengths and weaknesses according to our relative historical opportunities and operated better as a unit from leveraging those differential advantages.  We all agreed, even the 'least educated' of us, that investment in training and knowledge was invaluable, and yes, the source of it DID matter for it gave different skill sets.</p><p>But that is the curious thing about working in technology we all agreed upon.  Ultimately, it's aptitudes and a willingness to learn, adapt and evolve your skills as a professional that determines the value and success you have in your field.</p><p>The educational base is a starting point.  It DOES matter as perceptions matter, but it matters on tangential or lateral factors, not necessarily the quality of your expertise.  It's a factor, but not the sole factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The entire tone of this discussion and the article is disconcerting .
Although Mr. Spiegel does make a point to state that the cross section of skills and backgrounds was a major asset to having a good team of people at the end of his article , which I am pleased to see as I think that 's ultimately the major point.It is a rude , arrogant and fundamental mistake to classify one 's point of origin in terms of how they got to their position training wise as more significant than what they bring to the table in the current state of affairs.Working internationally , I worked in a team of people where we had as the three senior personnel significantly diverse backgrounds.One of us was an in the trenches , hands on education for their exceptional technical abilities .
They had studied independently and learned on the job perpetually.Another of us , was from a pure educational background originally with sporadic in the field access , having both a university degree and a post graduate technical diploma in technology.The third came from a blend of business and technical training with some educational basis and some in the field training.What we discovered quickly was the reason we were very good as a unit was the express reason that we tackled the problems from different vantage points .
Despite having some truly unique , problematic and specific cases to analyze and solve for our clients given our work environment , we rarely hit a problem we could n't as a team resolve , be it technical , technological , interpersonal ( and any tech that does n't think people are there problem is uneducated in a whole other sense... ) or financial.We all had strengths and weaknesses according to our relative historical opportunities and operated better as a unit from leveraging those differential advantages .
We all agreed , even the 'least educated ' of us , that investment in training and knowledge was invaluable , and yes , the source of it DID matter for it gave different skill sets.But that is the curious thing about working in technology we all agreed upon .
Ultimately , it 's aptitudes and a willingness to learn , adapt and evolve your skills as a professional that determines the value and success you have in your field.The educational base is a starting point .
It DOES matter as perceptions matter , but it matters on tangential or lateral factors , not necessarily the quality of your expertise .
It 's a factor , but not the sole factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entire tone of this discussion and the article is disconcerting.
Although Mr. Spiegel does make a point to state that the cross section of skills and backgrounds was a major asset to having a good team of people at the end of his article, which  I am pleased to see as I think that's ultimately the major point.It is a rude, arrogant and fundamental mistake to classify one's point of origin in terms of how they got to their position training wise as more significant than what they bring to the table in the current state of affairs.Working internationally, I worked in a team of people where we had as the three senior personnel significantly diverse backgrounds.One of us was an in the trenches, hands on education for their exceptional technical abilities.
They had studied independently and learned on the job perpetually.Another of us, was from a pure educational background originally with sporadic in the field access, having both a university degree and a post graduate technical diploma in technology.The third came from a blend of business and technical training with some educational basis and some in the field training.What we discovered quickly was the reason we were very good as a unit was the express reason that we tackled the problems from different vantage points.
Despite having some truly unique, problematic and specific cases to analyze and solve for our clients given our work environment, we rarely hit a problem we couldn't as a team resolve, be it technical, technological, interpersonal (and any tech that doesn't think people are there problem is uneducated in a whole other sense...) or financial.We all had strengths and weaknesses according to our relative historical opportunities and operated better as a unit from leveraging those differential advantages.
We all agreed, even the 'least educated' of us, that investment in training and knowledge was invaluable, and yes, the source of it DID matter for it gave different skill sets.But that is the curious thing about working in technology we all agreed upon.
Ultimately, it's aptitudes and a willingness to learn, adapt and evolve your skills as a professional that determines the value and success you have in your field.The educational base is a starting point.
It DOES matter as perceptions matter, but it matters on tangential or lateral factors, not necessarily the quality of your expertise.
It's a factor, but not the sole factor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108382</id>
	<title>Spelling...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258276500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the dude didn't go to college or university.  Wow, newsflash.<br>The guy who did can't even spell quiet.  It's QUIET, not quite.  Very<br>easy to know the difference.  Just tell yourself that you're being<br>not quite quiet yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the dude did n't go to college or university .
Wow , newsflash.The guy who did ca n't even spell quiet .
It 's QUIET , not quite .
Veryeasy to know the difference .
Just tell yourself that you 're beingnot quite quiet yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the dude didn't go to college or university.
Wow, newsflash.The guy who did can't even spell quiet.
It's QUIET, not quite.
Veryeasy to know the difference.
Just tell yourself that you're beingnot quite quiet yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107430</id>
	<title>Wow, That's a Loaded Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, those aren't questions in the summary.  It's a bunch of statements.  When you frame your "questions" the way the summary did, there's not a whole lot for anyone to say.  There's nothing else for me to say except to refute the basic premise of what the summary laid out.</p><p>I went to a four year college and got my degree in CS.  My college is actually very prestigious but for its humanities, economics, and other non-CS related fields.  I went there knowing that because I wasn't sure what I wanted to do when I started college.  With that said, I did studied a lot of humanities and non-CS subjects because they interested me and my college encouraged me to explore.  Nonetheless, I did study computer science rigorously, especially in the more theoretical areas such as graph algorithms and triangulation/localization algorithms.  The way the summary is written, it made it sound like people like me don't know what a big-O notation means or what a pointer is.  That's really unfair.  If someone mistreats you because of your two year degree, the right approach isn't to denigrate people with four year degrees.</p><p>I've been in the industry for a while.  The times when the degree matters is when the recruiter go searching for candidates.  They search for skill sets but also for specific groups of schools when hiring interns or new college grads.  Why?  It's based on the perception that those who go to prestigious schools tend to be fairly intelligent because the schools themselves do a good job of weeding out bad students.  It doesn't mean all students from those schools are good nor does it mean people who go to two year schools are bad.  You have to think of it in terms of probability and inference.  With that said, schools pay a role mostly when hiring for NCGs and interns.  For experienced candidates, we usually don't even bother look at that.  In fact, most candidates put that information last on their resume and we glance at it at most.  The most important part is the ability to solve problems and write good code.</p><p>BTW, the article itself is pretty horrible.  It doesn't even say anything of value.  It's just a bunch of guys arguing and being judgmental.  Grow up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , those are n't questions in the summary .
It 's a bunch of statements .
When you frame your " questions " the way the summary did , there 's not a whole lot for anyone to say .
There 's nothing else for me to say except to refute the basic premise of what the summary laid out.I went to a four year college and got my degree in CS .
My college is actually very prestigious but for its humanities , economics , and other non-CS related fields .
I went there knowing that because I was n't sure what I wanted to do when I started college .
With that said , I did studied a lot of humanities and non-CS subjects because they interested me and my college encouraged me to explore .
Nonetheless , I did study computer science rigorously , especially in the more theoretical areas such as graph algorithms and triangulation/localization algorithms .
The way the summary is written , it made it sound like people like me do n't know what a big-O notation means or what a pointer is .
That 's really unfair .
If someone mistreats you because of your two year degree , the right approach is n't to denigrate people with four year degrees.I 've been in the industry for a while .
The times when the degree matters is when the recruiter go searching for candidates .
They search for skill sets but also for specific groups of schools when hiring interns or new college grads .
Why ? It 's based on the perception that those who go to prestigious schools tend to be fairly intelligent because the schools themselves do a good job of weeding out bad students .
It does n't mean all students from those schools are good nor does it mean people who go to two year schools are bad .
You have to think of it in terms of probability and inference .
With that said , schools pay a role mostly when hiring for NCGs and interns .
For experienced candidates , we usually do n't even bother look at that .
In fact , most candidates put that information last on their resume and we glance at it at most .
The most important part is the ability to solve problems and write good code.BTW , the article itself is pretty horrible .
It does n't even say anything of value .
It 's just a bunch of guys arguing and being judgmental .
Grow up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, those aren't questions in the summary.
It's a bunch of statements.
When you frame your "questions" the way the summary did, there's not a whole lot for anyone to say.
There's nothing else for me to say except to refute the basic premise of what the summary laid out.I went to a four year college and got my degree in CS.
My college is actually very prestigious but for its humanities, economics, and other non-CS related fields.
I went there knowing that because I wasn't sure what I wanted to do when I started college.
With that said, I did studied a lot of humanities and non-CS subjects because they interested me and my college encouraged me to explore.
Nonetheless, I did study computer science rigorously, especially in the more theoretical areas such as graph algorithms and triangulation/localization algorithms.
The way the summary is written, it made it sound like people like me don't know what a big-O notation means or what a pointer is.
That's really unfair.
If someone mistreats you because of your two year degree, the right approach isn't to denigrate people with four year degrees.I've been in the industry for a while.
The times when the degree matters is when the recruiter go searching for candidates.
They search for skill sets but also for specific groups of schools when hiring interns or new college grads.
Why?  It's based on the perception that those who go to prestigious schools tend to be fairly intelligent because the schools themselves do a good job of weeding out bad students.
It doesn't mean all students from those schools are good nor does it mean people who go to two year schools are bad.
You have to think of it in terms of probability and inference.
With that said, schools pay a role mostly when hiring for NCGs and interns.
For experienced candidates, we usually don't even bother look at that.
In fact, most candidates put that information last on their resume and we glance at it at most.
The most important part is the ability to solve problems and write good code.BTW, the article itself is pretty horrible.
It doesn't even say anything of value.
It's just a bunch of guys arguing and being judgmental.
Grow up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112382</id>
	<title>Adults</title>
	<author>dermerzel</author>
	<datestamp>1258311480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think college teaches you better understanding of the world and attempts to make more of an adult of you. We don't raise adults here in the states. Look at what we watch what on TV then ask your self, is this really what an educated person would watch?
So, out of high school, sure you can program, do a little math and run a chain up your nose and out your mouth to impress your friends and of course your girl. College at least attempts to let you know that some things are not socially acceptable in the society we bred as the people we call adults. College is worth that little piece of paper if for nothing else than to let you have a more of a responsibility to whom you are.
Yes, there are exceptions for everyone, but you are probably not him/her. So with a better education, your code is better. College gives you a head start into being an adult, with adult insight w/o having to age to get the same results.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think college teaches you better understanding of the world and attempts to make more of an adult of you .
We do n't raise adults here in the states .
Look at what we watch what on TV then ask your self , is this really what an educated person would watch ?
So , out of high school , sure you can program , do a little math and run a chain up your nose and out your mouth to impress your friends and of course your girl .
College at least attempts to let you know that some things are not socially acceptable in the society we bred as the people we call adults .
College is worth that little piece of paper if for nothing else than to let you have a more of a responsibility to whom you are .
Yes , there are exceptions for everyone , but you are probably not him/her .
So with a better education , your code is better .
College gives you a head start into being an adult , with adult insight w/o having to age to get the same results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think college teaches you better understanding of the world and attempts to make more of an adult of you.
We don't raise adults here in the states.
Look at what we watch what on TV then ask your self, is this really what an educated person would watch?
So, out of high school, sure you can program, do a little math and run a chain up your nose and out your mouth to impress your friends and of course your girl.
College at least attempts to let you know that some things are not socially acceptable in the society we bred as the people we call adults.
College is worth that little piece of paper if for nothing else than to let you have a more of a responsibility to whom you are.
Yes, there are exceptions for everyone, but you are probably not him/her.
So with a better education, your code is better.
College gives you a head start into being an adult, with adult insight w/o having to age to get the same results.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110930</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>sfcat</author>
	<datestamp>1258295760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you can get through a CS degree (after C++ 101) without writing any code, you should get your money back.  At CMU, almost every CS class required writing copious amounts of code including a kernel, filesystem and terminal in OS class.  Any CS program worth a damn will be similar.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can get through a CS degree ( after C + + 101 ) without writing any code , you should get your money back .
At CMU , almost every CS class required writing copious amounts of code including a kernel , filesystem and terminal in OS class .
Any CS program worth a damn will be similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can get through a CS degree (after C++ 101) without writing any code, you should get your money back.
At CMU, almost every CS class required writing copious amounts of code including a kernel, filesystem and terminal in OS class.
Any CS program worth a damn will be similar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774</id>
	<title>Perseverance</title>
	<author>najay</author>
	<datestamp>1258278900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A 4 year degree shows you can start a complex, diverse series of tasks and stick with them to completion. People that don't<br>have degrees are normally the free thinker types that have problems finishing projects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A 4 year degree shows you can start a complex , diverse series of tasks and stick with them to completion .
People that don'thave degrees are normally the free thinker types that have problems finishing projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 4 year degree shows you can start a complex, diverse series of tasks and stick with them to completion.
People that don'thave degrees are normally the free thinker types that have problems finishing projects.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113782</id>
	<title>Re:Slaves wear collars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258374780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time someone collared me I bit  him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time someone collared me I bit him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time someone collared me I bit  him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117730</id>
	<title>How about both?</title>
	<author>Richard Steiner</author>
	<datestamp>1258396740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I learned BASIC, Fortran, and bits of 6502 assembly before going to college.</p><p>In college, I went through the formal CompSci program and graduated with a BSCS with a focus on "systems software" (basic OS/language/compiler theory), but also had exposure to several additional languages and environments as well as team projects.</p><p>I've written software (mainly applications, though not all) for a living now for 21 years, and computers are both my vocation and avocation.  I get paid to play with software, and I love every minute of it.</p><p>I wish more software developers were curious about things.  I think it's that curiosity and level of interest which breeds better insight, not simply formal training or experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I learned BASIC , Fortran , and bits of 6502 assembly before going to college.In college , I went through the formal CompSci program and graduated with a BSCS with a focus on " systems software " ( basic OS/language/compiler theory ) , but also had exposure to several additional languages and environments as well as team projects.I 've written software ( mainly applications , though not all ) for a living now for 21 years , and computers are both my vocation and avocation .
I get paid to play with software , and I love every minute of it.I wish more software developers were curious about things .
I think it 's that curiosity and level of interest which breeds better insight , not simply formal training or experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I learned BASIC, Fortran, and bits of 6502 assembly before going to college.In college, I went through the formal CompSci program and graduated with a BSCS with a focus on "systems software" (basic OS/language/compiler theory), but also had exposure to several additional languages and environments as well as team projects.I've written software (mainly applications, though not all) for a living now for 21 years, and computers are both my vocation and avocation.
I get paid to play with software, and I love every minute of it.I wish more software developers were curious about things.
I think it's that curiosity and level of interest which breeds better insight, not simply formal training or experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107304</id>
	<title>Getting in over your head</title>
	<author>chrisreedy</author>
	<datestamp>1258313820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who spent a lot of years observing software projects gone bad<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I prefer someone with a four year degree because they have a better chance of knowing when they are in over their head. Some examples: Trying to build a mini-compiler without understanding anything about parsing, yacc, lex, etc. Trying to build a special purpose DBMS without understanding DB theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who spent a lot of years observing software projects gone bad ... I prefer someone with a four year degree because they have a better chance of knowing when they are in over their head .
Some examples : Trying to build a mini-compiler without understanding anything about parsing , yacc , lex , etc .
Trying to build a special purpose DBMS without understanding DB theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who spent a lot of years observing software projects gone bad ... I prefer someone with a four year degree because they have a better chance of knowing when they are in over their head.
Some examples: Trying to build a mini-compiler without understanding anything about parsing, yacc, lex, etc.
Trying to build a special purpose DBMS without understanding DB theory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113570</id>
	<title>Re:gotta filter the applicants somehow</title>
	<author>hab136</author>
	<datestamp>1258371600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>the one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired. After all we want "lucky" people working here.</p></div></blockquote><p>You must have some pretty sticky ceilings.  I wouldn't call the people who get hired "lucky".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the one ( s ) that stick to the ceiling get hired .
After all we want " lucky " people working here.You must have some pretty sticky ceilings .
I would n't call the people who get hired " lucky " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired.
After all we want "lucky" people working here.You must have some pretty sticky ceilings.
I wouldn't call the people who get hired "lucky".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107384</id>
	<title>Education Happens Outside the Classroom</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's nothing that can be learned in the classroom that can't be learned outside the classroom.  Most high quality developers started teaching themselves before they were old enough to go to college.  However, many people don't have the discipline to really push themselves to learn new important concepts without a teacher directing them.</p><p>One of the reasons that a degree is required is that the employer knows that you have learned the important concepts.  Otherwise you need to fill your resume with very complex projects to prove your knowledge.  The alternative to a formal education is doing projects on your own time that you can talk about on your resume.  If it's not worth putting on your resume you're not trying hard enough.</p><p>Another reason is simply elitism.  Play the education game or prove yourself with resume quality projects.  Or even better, do both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing that can be learned in the classroom that ca n't be learned outside the classroom .
Most high quality developers started teaching themselves before they were old enough to go to college .
However , many people do n't have the discipline to really push themselves to learn new important concepts without a teacher directing them.One of the reasons that a degree is required is that the employer knows that you have learned the important concepts .
Otherwise you need to fill your resume with very complex projects to prove your knowledge .
The alternative to a formal education is doing projects on your own time that you can talk about on your resume .
If it 's not worth putting on your resume you 're not trying hard enough.Another reason is simply elitism .
Play the education game or prove yourself with resume quality projects .
Or even better , do both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing that can be learned in the classroom that can't be learned outside the classroom.
Most high quality developers started teaching themselves before they were old enough to go to college.
However, many people don't have the discipline to really push themselves to learn new important concepts without a teacher directing them.One of the reasons that a degree is required is that the employer knows that you have learned the important concepts.
Otherwise you need to fill your resume with very complex projects to prove your knowledge.
The alternative to a formal education is doing projects on your own time that you can talk about on your resume.
If it's not worth putting on your resume you're not trying hard enough.Another reason is simply elitism.
Play the education game or prove yourself with resume quality projects.
Or even better, do both.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109540</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1258284360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How does one "queue" awkward silence?</p></div><p>Mostly it happens in the teen years when you do something wrong and the principal, your mom, and your dad queue up so they can each, in turn, ask you what the hell you thought you were doing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does one " queue " awkward silence ? Mostly it happens in the teen years when you do something wrong and the principal , your mom , and your dad queue up so they can each , in turn , ask you what the hell you thought you were doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does one "queue" awkward silence?Mostly it happens in the teen years when you do something wrong and the principal, your mom, and your dad queue up so they can each, in turn, ask you what the hell you thought you were doing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114492</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>JoeMerchant</author>
	<datestamp>1258382400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh and you know all those big O notations...</p></div><p>Yeah, I know them well, and a Ph.D employee of mine just couldn't seem to make his histogram code run fast enough, so we dissected it and found he had an un-necessary loop in it (an extra +1 on his O), he never could understand how it worked without that loop....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh and you know all those big O notations...Yeah , I know them well , and a Ph.D employee of mine just could n't seem to make his histogram code run fast enough , so we dissected it and found he had an un-necessary loop in it ( an extra + 1 on his O ) , he never could understand how it worked without that loop... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh and you know all those big O notations...Yeah, I know them well, and a Ph.D employee of mine just couldn't seem to make his histogram code run fast enough, so we dissected it and found he had an un-necessary loop in it (an extra +1 on his O), he never could understand how it worked without that loop....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108702</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258278360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course, there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching, but separating them from the chaff (and overcoming their egos) is rarely worth the time in my experience.</p></div><p>Prodigies don't need to be screened like all the others, they come up by themselves, and soon enough it is their fame that make them wanted by companies. If that doesn't happen, they weren't really prodigies (or they were too detached from reality to be of use to any company anyway).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching , but separating them from the chaff ( and overcoming their egos ) is rarely worth the time in my experience.Prodigies do n't need to be screened like all the others , they come up by themselves , and soon enough it is their fame that make them wanted by companies .
If that does n't happen , they were n't really prodigies ( or they were too detached from reality to be of use to any company anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching, but separating them from the chaff (and overcoming their egos) is rarely worth the time in my experience.Prodigies don't need to be screened like all the others, they come up by themselves, and soon enough it is their fame that make them wanted by companies.
If that doesn't happen, they weren't really prodigies (or they were too detached from reality to be of use to any company anyway).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108798</id>
	<title>my collar is iron</title>
	<author>sneakyimp</author>
	<datestamp>1258279020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if I can...just...manage...to...get it off I might get another job that isn't so dreary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if I can...just...manage...to...get it off I might get another job that is n't so dreary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if I can...just...manage...to...get it off I might get another job that isn't so dreary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113184</id>
	<title>Want a Fish or a Fishing rod?</title>
	<author>JPP111</author>
	<datestamp>1258365780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A degree teaches you how to learn, the others schools just teach content.  In IT, you want someone who can pick up new things, as the tech is moving quickly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A degree teaches you how to learn , the others schools just teach content .
In IT , you want someone who can pick up new things , as the tech is moving quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A degree teaches you how to learn, the others schools just teach content.
In IT, you want someone who can pick up new things, as the tech is moving quickly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30123738</id>
	<title>Unemployed CS graduate</title>
	<author>freedomFiles</author>
	<datestamp>1258375260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don&rsquo;t get it. I&rsquo;m a CS graduate and I can&rsquo;t get a job. Apparently these vocational qualifications trump my useless education. The recruiters are even fitting little macros to filter out the people who don&rsquo;t have say, MCSE or any other of this &lsquo;kinda stuff&rsquo;. A recruiter from London &ndash; working for one of these &lsquo;dodgy Microsoft courses&rsquo; even had the balls to phone me up and tell me that I did&rsquo;nt know computing because I had no MCSE. Few points here with regards to this. If you need to go on a 3 year course to work Windows then by the Gods you&rsquo;re a bit daft. IN those 3 years you should know how to administrate, disassemble and fix stuff using a multitude of skills. If you did&rsquo;nt get to go to Univeristy to study CS because of your grades or lack of them then let that tell you something. I&rsquo;ll admit that there are people who come through the edu system and can&rsquo;t even switch a computer on. They usually become IT recruiters though, eventually, when they become sufficiently embarrassed that is. Computing is a science. How many Chemists do you know without a degree? How many Physicists did&rsquo;nt study at uni? I know, lets hire the tv repair guy to design our brand new s-o-a tv set and forget about the electronics engineers because they went to uni. Just another point &ndash; an important one. Are we really doomed to a future of MS, Oracle, IBM etc dictating how we should be educated in computing because it&rsquo;s starting to look that way. The arseholes are making a bucket load of money out of too I bet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I don    t get it .
I    m a CS graduate and I can    t get a job .
Apparently these vocational qualifications trump my useless education .
The recruiters are even fitting little macros to filter out the people who don    t have say , MCSE or any other of this    kinda stuff    .
A recruiter from London    working for one of these    dodgy Microsoft courses    even had the balls to phone me up and tell me that I did    nt know computing because I had no MCSE .
Few points here with regards to this .
If you need to go on a 3 year course to work Windows then by the Gods you    re a bit daft .
IN those 3 years you should know how to administrate , disassemble and fix stuff using a multitude of skills .
If you did    nt get to go to Univeristy to study CS because of your grades or lack of them then let that tell you something .
I    ll admit that there are people who come through the edu system and can    t even switch a computer on .
They usually become IT recruiters though , eventually , when they become sufficiently embarrassed that is .
Computing is a science .
How many Chemists do you know without a degree ?
How many Physicists did    nt study at uni ?
I know , lets hire the tv repair guy to design our brand new s-o-a tv set and forget about the electronics engineers because they went to uni .
Just another point    an important one .
Are we really doomed to a future of MS , Oracle , IBM etc dictating how we should be educated in computing because it    s starting to look that way .
The arseholes are making a bucket load of money out of too I bet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don’t get it.
I’m a CS graduate and I can’t get a job.
Apparently these vocational qualifications trump my useless education.
The recruiters are even fitting little macros to filter out the people who don’t have say, MCSE or any other of this ‘kinda stuff’.
A recruiter from London – working for one of these ‘dodgy Microsoft courses’ even had the balls to phone me up and tell me that I did’nt know computing because I had no MCSE.
Few points here with regards to this.
If you need to go on a 3 year course to work Windows then by the Gods you’re a bit daft.
IN those 3 years you should know how to administrate, disassemble and fix stuff using a multitude of skills.
If you did’nt get to go to Univeristy to study CS because of your grades or lack of them then let that tell you something.
I’ll admit that there are people who come through the edu system and can’t even switch a computer on.
They usually become IT recruiters though, eventually, when they become sufficiently embarrassed that is.
Computing is a science.
How many Chemists do you know without a degree?
How many Physicists did’nt study at uni?
I know, lets hire the tv repair guy to design our brand new s-o-a tv set and forget about the electronics engineers because they went to uni.
Just another point – an important one.
Are we really doomed to a future of MS, Oracle, IBM etc dictating how we should be educated in computing because it’s starting to look that way.
The arseholes are making a bucket load of money out of too I bet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109244</id>
	<title>Re:gotta filter the applicants somehow</title>
	<author>francium de neobie</author>
	<datestamp>1258282260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it's just a few dozens you can just give them a take home exam. Using the resume alone in filtering people is sleazy if you can afford ANY other method of filtering.<br> <br>
(Ok, I know you're trying to be funny)</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's just a few dozens you can just give them a take home exam .
Using the resume alone in filtering people is sleazy if you can afford ANY other method of filtering .
( Ok , I know you 're trying to be funny )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's just a few dozens you can just give them a take home exam.
Using the resume alone in filtering people is sleazy if you can afford ANY other method of filtering.
(Ok, I know you're trying to be funny)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109460</id>
	<title>The Blue Collar ones stay employed longer.</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1258283880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The companies that depend on the programming theoreticians who know a hundred algorithms but no syntax to implement them, and know PROLOG better than C, tend to go under with the first problem in the market.</p><p>The companies that depend on a solid programming skill are more successful.</p><p>I worked at one of the latter kind. The unofficial guidelines were:</p><p>- make it so bulletproof that if 80\% of the system goes down, the remaining 20\% should still do its work just fine. Example: operating for a week from memory cache only is perfectly acceptable if the database went down and takes too long to be replaced. (so first check if new data can be obtained, only then expire the old).<br>- write it in a way that makes understanding the code take less than write the documentation for it. Then don't write the developer documentation. Just user-side one, and only the needed content, no fluff.<br>- make it so that it could run for years without maintenance, then run it without maintenance. When the need arises, a new developer will spend extra 2 hours researching the system before applying the (sometimes 5-minute) fix. It's still cheaper than to keep someone maintaining it over the whole period.<br>- a system that does 90\% of the job for 20\% of the cost is better than one that does 100\% of the job for 100\% of the cost. A reboot once a week is cheaper than 6 days of developer's work eliminating all the leaks.</p><p>There were some side-effects. Some subsystems were written in 3 different variants independently, and coexisted, with no preference which is the right one. Some stuff was simply easier to write from scratch.</p><p>The funniest one was a lost portal. I mean, the company maintained some 200 different services, portals and so on. News, hobbies, some very generic, some very specific like a shop with projects of houses or an artists service. And one day someone asks on the company-wide "offtopic" list, which business unit "owns" [some URL]. It seems the service under that link is a strict duplicate of functionality of one of our more prestigious services, only much poorer in content and not updated in some 5 years (although the fora kept by the users and moderated by moderators who are a kingdom by themselves, are alive, with users asking their questions and other users answering.) Nobody admits, some research takes place - yes, there is the code base, not touched in well over 5 years, there are the tables in the database, yes, it is one of our services, fully functional, new articles can be posted at any time, generic and targetted ads get rotated, the mailing list accepts new subscribers even if no new newsletters are created, and the user database sees some 5 new users every week. And someone recalls... it was rewritten from scratch 5 years ago, the new version went online under a new address, and is our new flagship product, and the old one was to be scrapped a month later, except someone forgot to scrape it. And so, a forgotten ghost portal existed somewhere in the monstrosity, and worked for 5 years with nobody in the company ever noticing its existence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The companies that depend on the programming theoreticians who know a hundred algorithms but no syntax to implement them , and know PROLOG better than C , tend to go under with the first problem in the market.The companies that depend on a solid programming skill are more successful.I worked at one of the latter kind .
The unofficial guidelines were : - make it so bulletproof that if 80 \ % of the system goes down , the remaining 20 \ % should still do its work just fine .
Example : operating for a week from memory cache only is perfectly acceptable if the database went down and takes too long to be replaced .
( so first check if new data can be obtained , only then expire the old ) .- write it in a way that makes understanding the code take less than write the documentation for it .
Then do n't write the developer documentation .
Just user-side one , and only the needed content , no fluff.- make it so that it could run for years without maintenance , then run it without maintenance .
When the need arises , a new developer will spend extra 2 hours researching the system before applying the ( sometimes 5-minute ) fix .
It 's still cheaper than to keep someone maintaining it over the whole period.- a system that does 90 \ % of the job for 20 \ % of the cost is better than one that does 100 \ % of the job for 100 \ % of the cost .
A reboot once a week is cheaper than 6 days of developer 's work eliminating all the leaks.There were some side-effects .
Some subsystems were written in 3 different variants independently , and coexisted , with no preference which is the right one .
Some stuff was simply easier to write from scratch.The funniest one was a lost portal .
I mean , the company maintained some 200 different services , portals and so on .
News , hobbies , some very generic , some very specific like a shop with projects of houses or an artists service .
And one day someone asks on the company-wide " offtopic " list , which business unit " owns " [ some URL ] .
It seems the service under that link is a strict duplicate of functionality of one of our more prestigious services , only much poorer in content and not updated in some 5 years ( although the fora kept by the users and moderated by moderators who are a kingdom by themselves , are alive , with users asking their questions and other users answering .
) Nobody admits , some research takes place - yes , there is the code base , not touched in well over 5 years , there are the tables in the database , yes , it is one of our services , fully functional , new articles can be posted at any time , generic and targetted ads get rotated , the mailing list accepts new subscribers even if no new newsletters are created , and the user database sees some 5 new users every week .
And someone recalls... it was rewritten from scratch 5 years ago , the new version went online under a new address , and is our new flagship product , and the old one was to be scrapped a month later , except someone forgot to scrape it .
And so , a forgotten ghost portal existed somewhere in the monstrosity , and worked for 5 years with nobody in the company ever noticing its existence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The companies that depend on the programming theoreticians who know a hundred algorithms but no syntax to implement them, and know PROLOG better than C, tend to go under with the first problem in the market.The companies that depend on a solid programming skill are more successful.I worked at one of the latter kind.
The unofficial guidelines were:- make it so bulletproof that if 80\% of the system goes down, the remaining 20\% should still do its work just fine.
Example: operating for a week from memory cache only is perfectly acceptable if the database went down and takes too long to be replaced.
(so first check if new data can be obtained, only then expire the old).- write it in a way that makes understanding the code take less than write the documentation for it.
Then don't write the developer documentation.
Just user-side one, and only the needed content, no fluff.- make it so that it could run for years without maintenance, then run it without maintenance.
When the need arises, a new developer will spend extra 2 hours researching the system before applying the (sometimes 5-minute) fix.
It's still cheaper than to keep someone maintaining it over the whole period.- a system that does 90\% of the job for 20\% of the cost is better than one that does 100\% of the job for 100\% of the cost.
A reboot once a week is cheaper than 6 days of developer's work eliminating all the leaks.There were some side-effects.
Some subsystems were written in 3 different variants independently, and coexisted, with no preference which is the right one.
Some stuff was simply easier to write from scratch.The funniest one was a lost portal.
I mean, the company maintained some 200 different services, portals and so on.
News, hobbies, some very generic, some very specific like a shop with projects of houses or an artists service.
And one day someone asks on the company-wide "offtopic" list, which business unit "owns" [some URL].
It seems the service under that link is a strict duplicate of functionality of one of our more prestigious services, only much poorer in content and not updated in some 5 years (although the fora kept by the users and moderated by moderators who are a kingdom by themselves, are alive, with users asking their questions and other users answering.
) Nobody admits, some research takes place - yes, there is the code base, not touched in well over 5 years, there are the tables in the database, yes, it is one of our services, fully functional, new articles can be posted at any time, generic and targetted ads get rotated, the mailing list accepts new subscribers even if no new newsletters are created, and the user database sees some 5 new users every week.
And someone recalls... it was rewritten from scratch 5 years ago, the new version went online under a new address, and is our new flagship product, and the old one was to be scrapped a month later, except someone forgot to scrape it.
And so, a forgotten ghost portal existed somewhere in the monstrosity, and worked for 5 years with nobody in the company ever noticing its existence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108174</id>
	<title>Perception Perception Perception</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1258318620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whether a 4-year degree makes one a "better" coder or not is a side issue to the most important question from the work-world perspective: what impression does it give to potential employers? All things being equal, the perception is that having a 4-year degree makes one a better candidate. It's kind of a <b>cover-your-ass</b> step. If the candidate turns out shitty and doesn't have a 4-year degree, then human resources etc. are chewed out for skipping that criteria.</p><p>It's the default assumption for hiring programmers, and if you deviate from the default assumptions, you take on the risk of being criticized for that deviating. Whether that's fair or not is moot: it's the psychology of the work-place.</p><p>I generally agree with the poster who says it's the effort and energy you put into the work, not so much your base education. If you desire to perfect your art, you will find a way, be it reading, practice, or both. Wise people also know when to ask for help from others in areas they are weak in.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether a 4-year degree makes one a " better " coder or not is a side issue to the most important question from the work-world perspective : what impression does it give to potential employers ?
All things being equal , the perception is that having a 4-year degree makes one a better candidate .
It 's kind of a cover-your-ass step .
If the candidate turns out shitty and does n't have a 4-year degree , then human resources etc .
are chewed out for skipping that criteria.It 's the default assumption for hiring programmers , and if you deviate from the default assumptions , you take on the risk of being criticized for that deviating .
Whether that 's fair or not is moot : it 's the psychology of the work-place.I generally agree with the poster who says it 's the effort and energy you put into the work , not so much your base education .
If you desire to perfect your art , you will find a way , be it reading , practice , or both .
Wise people also know when to ask for help from others in areas they are weak in .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether a 4-year degree makes one a "better" coder or not is a side issue to the most important question from the work-world perspective: what impression does it give to potential employers?
All things being equal, the perception is that having a 4-year degree makes one a better candidate.
It's kind of a cover-your-ass step.
If the candidate turns out shitty and doesn't have a 4-year degree, then human resources etc.
are chewed out for skipping that criteria.It's the default assumption for hiring programmers, and if you deviate from the default assumptions, you take on the risk of being criticized for that deviating.
Whether that's fair or not is moot: it's the psychology of the work-place.I generally agree with the poster who says it's the effort and energy you put into the work, not so much your base education.
If you desire to perfect your art, you will find a way, be it reading, practice, or both.
Wise people also know when to ask for help from others in areas they are weak in.
     </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117178</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1258395060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;How does one "queue" awkward silence?<br>If you have queued the actions of the actors, the awkward silence could be queued too, but this is only possible in a situation where the entire thing was in a command queue, such as in a film being done with CGI.</p><p>In that case you could, in reality, queue the awkward silence likely as a part of a conversation sequence rendering queue between two cgi actors, during a dialog where awkward silence was part of the script.</p><p>Other than that, the awkward silence would be cued as you have indicated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; How does one " queue " awkward silence ? If you have queued the actions of the actors , the awkward silence could be queued too , but this is only possible in a situation where the entire thing was in a command queue , such as in a film being done with CGI.In that case you could , in reality , queue the awkward silence likely as a part of a conversation sequence rendering queue between two cgi actors , during a dialog where awkward silence was part of the script.Other than that , the awkward silence would be cued as you have indicated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;How does one "queue" awkward silence?If you have queued the actions of the actors, the awkward silence could be queued too, but this is only possible in a situation where the entire thing was in a command queue, such as in a film being done with CGI.In that case you could, in reality, queue the awkward silence likely as a part of a conversation sequence rendering queue between two cgi actors, during a dialog where awkward silence was part of the script.Other than that, the awkward silence would be cued as you have indicated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107620</id>
	<title>There's a stigma attached to that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258315680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108578</id>
	<title>A 4 year degree shows work ethic</title>
	<author>Dan667</author>
	<datestamp>1258277700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the reason a lot of people look for degrees when filling jobs is that it is a good sign of the work ethic and desire to finish of the person.  In the absence of an extensive job history it is all a lot of people have to go on to know if the person who may know the skills will actually show up and do the work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the reason a lot of people look for degrees when filling jobs is that it is a good sign of the work ethic and desire to finish of the person .
In the absence of an extensive job history it is all a lot of people have to go on to know if the person who may know the skills will actually show up and do the work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the reason a lot of people look for degrees when filling jobs is that it is a good sign of the work ethic and desire to finish of the person.
In the absence of an extensive job history it is all a lot of people have to go on to know if the person who may know the skills will actually show up and do the work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108082</id>
	<title>White Collar is better</title>
	<author>slimjim8094</author>
	<datestamp>1258317960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disclaimer: I'm a CS major in the engineering school of an Ivy.</p><p>Look, computer science has nothing to do with programming. It's about taking a problem and coming up with a series of steps to solve it. Taking that mental representation of an algorithm and turning it into code is the least of your troubles.</p><p>In a tech school, I imagine that's not really the focus. Someone can be a great codemonkey coming from a technical school, but I'm not so sure that they could reliably come up with an elegant, efficient algorithm to do most anything - and more importantly, understand why.</p><p>Plus, at a university, you have the opportunity to expand yourself as a person by learning other things - which helps in any job. For example, I'm taking a (required) writing seminar that's basically about rhetoric. It's the first (and likely) only rhetorical training I'll ever receive, and I'm extremely glad I'm doing it.</p><p>Computer science is (I think) like other engineering. A computer scientist is like a structural engineer building a bridge - he might not actually build the bridge himself, but he'll figure out how to build each piece and makes sure it'll all fit together. The guys actually building the bridge (welders, crane operators, etc) are still skilled, but mostly following a cookbook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disclaimer : I 'm a CS major in the engineering school of an Ivy.Look , computer science has nothing to do with programming .
It 's about taking a problem and coming up with a series of steps to solve it .
Taking that mental representation of an algorithm and turning it into code is the least of your troubles.In a tech school , I imagine that 's not really the focus .
Someone can be a great codemonkey coming from a technical school , but I 'm not so sure that they could reliably come up with an elegant , efficient algorithm to do most anything - and more importantly , understand why.Plus , at a university , you have the opportunity to expand yourself as a person by learning other things - which helps in any job .
For example , I 'm taking a ( required ) writing seminar that 's basically about rhetoric .
It 's the first ( and likely ) only rhetorical training I 'll ever receive , and I 'm extremely glad I 'm doing it.Computer science is ( I think ) like other engineering .
A computer scientist is like a structural engineer building a bridge - he might not actually build the bridge himself , but he 'll figure out how to build each piece and makes sure it 'll all fit together .
The guys actually building the bridge ( welders , crane operators , etc ) are still skilled , but mostly following a cookbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disclaimer: I'm a CS major in the engineering school of an Ivy.Look, computer science has nothing to do with programming.
It's about taking a problem and coming up with a series of steps to solve it.
Taking that mental representation of an algorithm and turning it into code is the least of your troubles.In a tech school, I imagine that's not really the focus.
Someone can be a great codemonkey coming from a technical school, but I'm not so sure that they could reliably come up with an elegant, efficient algorithm to do most anything - and more importantly, understand why.Plus, at a university, you have the opportunity to expand yourself as a person by learning other things - which helps in any job.
For example, I'm taking a (required) writing seminar that's basically about rhetoric.
It's the first (and likely) only rhetorical training I'll ever receive, and I'm extremely glad I'm doing it.Computer science is (I think) like other engineering.
A computer scientist is like a structural engineer building a bridge - he might not actually build the bridge himself, but he'll figure out how to build each piece and makes sure it'll all fit together.
The guys actually building the bridge (welders, crane operators, etc) are still skilled, but mostly following a cookbook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107892</id>
	<title>Re:White collar coders make better sheep</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This comment says way more about you than it does about the people you're ragging on.  The fact that you put the word "disciplined" in irony quotes as if that's not a good quality to have, combined with complaining about people who don't (in your opinion) complain enough is pretty telling.  It sounds like your mind has a tendency to always see your relationship with your bosses and coworkers as an Us vs. Them or Me vs. the world kind of thing, rather than being part of a team.  People with this attitude tend to be insecure or arrogant or (more often, although it seems like they should be mutually exclusive) both.</p><p>Certainly there are companies and segments of the industry where employees are pushed too hard to work overtime (game programmers, for example).  This is legitimately bad, and the correct response is to stay the heck away from those companies and work someplace with a more reasonable work/life balance.  But if you somehow always find yourself in situations where it feels like everyone around you thinks they're better than than you, but deep down inside you know that you're way better than them, then the problem is in your head and not your work environment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This comment says way more about you than it does about the people you 're ragging on .
The fact that you put the word " disciplined " in irony quotes as if that 's not a good quality to have , combined with complaining about people who do n't ( in your opinion ) complain enough is pretty telling .
It sounds like your mind has a tendency to always see your relationship with your bosses and coworkers as an Us vs. Them or Me vs. the world kind of thing , rather than being part of a team .
People with this attitude tend to be insecure or arrogant or ( more often , although it seems like they should be mutually exclusive ) both.Certainly there are companies and segments of the industry where employees are pushed too hard to work overtime ( game programmers , for example ) .
This is legitimately bad , and the correct response is to stay the heck away from those companies and work someplace with a more reasonable work/life balance .
But if you somehow always find yourself in situations where it feels like everyone around you thinks they 're better than than you , but deep down inside you know that you 're way better than them , then the problem is in your head and not your work environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This comment says way more about you than it does about the people you're ragging on.
The fact that you put the word "disciplined" in irony quotes as if that's not a good quality to have, combined with complaining about people who don't (in your opinion) complain enough is pretty telling.
It sounds like your mind has a tendency to always see your relationship with your bosses and coworkers as an Us vs. Them or Me vs. the world kind of thing, rather than being part of a team.
People with this attitude tend to be insecure or arrogant or (more often, although it seems like they should be mutually exclusive) both.Certainly there are companies and segments of the industry where employees are pushed too hard to work overtime (game programmers, for example).
This is legitimately bad, and the correct response is to stay the heck away from those companies and work someplace with a more reasonable work/life balance.
But if you somehow always find yourself in situations where it feels like everyone around you thinks they're better than than you, but deep down inside you know that you're way better than them, then the problem is in your head and not your work environment.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111042</id>
	<title>unix tradition is a beard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258296840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not collar<br>sorry....XD</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not collarsorry....XD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not collarsorry....XD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107644</id>
	<title>Personal Experience</title>
	<author>bsDaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1258315860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had computers as a hobby for many years, starting out with FreeBSD 2.2.8 when I was in 8th grade and teaching myself C and dabbling in a few other things as well.  I'm 25 and have a legitimate 5-digit ID, not that it means much other than I got started with being a nerd at an early age for some reason signed up for Slashdot.  I thought I was going to be a Comp Sci major, but then I quit and studied English and Classical History instead.<br><br>I still kept up with Unix-y things, and futzing around with Perl and stuff like that, and after an endless string of half-ass pseudo-success after college while trying to do the "english major" thing, I bit the bullet and got back into computers.  I've been employed for the last year and change as a Linux admin at a web hosting company, and just got a new job that I start next month where I'll probably have to write the occasional C code again, too.<br><br>Now, I think I'm a reasonably competent programmer -- definitely more so than one would expect from a liberal arts major, but I'm definitely not a computer scientists.  I'll read algorthims books and study stuff on my own, but I think I lack the degree of comprehension that someone who had it drilled and tested in a formal environment would.  I'm not a great programmer, but I can hold my own in the certain realms in which I need to write code, but computers are also not my entire life.<br><br>Most tech school people I have met are really only interested in computers and doing computer stuff.  They're the ones that throw the memes around and use terms like "lulz," and as long as they do their job, I don't really care.  But those I know who studied computer science are more likely to be able to talk with me about non-computer things, and I really appreciate that.  I make my living in technology, but my hobbies and interests are wide-ranging, and I don't always just want to talk about computers.  I also find that the university-trained computer scientists are more likely to be able to explain WHY they are doing what they're doing, why they made the design choices they did, and in general have a better understanding of the whole system rather than just doing things "they way they were taught" whether its the best or not.<br><br>Of course, I realize this is all just anecdote and not just data, and I'm probably going to piss some people off by saying, however I will stand behind the notion that university-trained computer scientists are going to be easier and more fun to deal with than someone with a more myopic view of their "trade."<br><br>Also, if you really want to get at why those with a 4-year degree from a "real" school get offered more and are picked first, its probably because those are the degrees that management understands, whether they understand the subject matter or not.  Management typically has a 4-year degree from a real school, and so they'd rather hire people with a piece of paper they "get" the value of.  Perhaps its an economic or educational prejudice, but such is life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had computers as a hobby for many years , starting out with FreeBSD 2.2.8 when I was in 8th grade and teaching myself C and dabbling in a few other things as well .
I 'm 25 and have a legitimate 5-digit ID , not that it means much other than I got started with being a nerd at an early age for some reason signed up for Slashdot .
I thought I was going to be a Comp Sci major , but then I quit and studied English and Classical History instead.I still kept up with Unix-y things , and futzing around with Perl and stuff like that , and after an endless string of half-ass pseudo-success after college while trying to do the " english major " thing , I bit the bullet and got back into computers .
I 've been employed for the last year and change as a Linux admin at a web hosting company , and just got a new job that I start next month where I 'll probably have to write the occasional C code again , too.Now , I think I 'm a reasonably competent programmer -- definitely more so than one would expect from a liberal arts major , but I 'm definitely not a computer scientists .
I 'll read algorthims books and study stuff on my own , but I think I lack the degree of comprehension that someone who had it drilled and tested in a formal environment would .
I 'm not a great programmer , but I can hold my own in the certain realms in which I need to write code , but computers are also not my entire life.Most tech school people I have met are really only interested in computers and doing computer stuff .
They 're the ones that throw the memes around and use terms like " lulz , " and as long as they do their job , I do n't really care .
But those I know who studied computer science are more likely to be able to talk with me about non-computer things , and I really appreciate that .
I make my living in technology , but my hobbies and interests are wide-ranging , and I do n't always just want to talk about computers .
I also find that the university-trained computer scientists are more likely to be able to explain WHY they are doing what they 're doing , why they made the design choices they did , and in general have a better understanding of the whole system rather than just doing things " they way they were taught " whether its the best or not.Of course , I realize this is all just anecdote and not just data , and I 'm probably going to piss some people off by saying , however I will stand behind the notion that university-trained computer scientists are going to be easier and more fun to deal with than someone with a more myopic view of their " trade .
" Also , if you really want to get at why those with a 4-year degree from a " real " school get offered more and are picked first , its probably because those are the degrees that management understands , whether they understand the subject matter or not .
Management typically has a 4-year degree from a real school , and so they 'd rather hire people with a piece of paper they " get " the value of .
Perhaps its an economic or educational prejudice , but such is life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had computers as a hobby for many years, starting out with FreeBSD 2.2.8 when I was in 8th grade and teaching myself C and dabbling in a few other things as well.
I'm 25 and have a legitimate 5-digit ID, not that it means much other than I got started with being a nerd at an early age for some reason signed up for Slashdot.
I thought I was going to be a Comp Sci major, but then I quit and studied English and Classical History instead.I still kept up with Unix-y things, and futzing around with Perl and stuff like that, and after an endless string of half-ass pseudo-success after college while trying to do the "english major" thing, I bit the bullet and got back into computers.
I've been employed for the last year and change as a Linux admin at a web hosting company, and just got a new job that I start next month where I'll probably have to write the occasional C code again, too.Now, I think I'm a reasonably competent programmer -- definitely more so than one would expect from a liberal arts major, but I'm definitely not a computer scientists.
I'll read algorthims books and study stuff on my own, but I think I lack the degree of comprehension that someone who had it drilled and tested in a formal environment would.
I'm not a great programmer, but I can hold my own in the certain realms in which I need to write code, but computers are also not my entire life.Most tech school people I have met are really only interested in computers and doing computer stuff.
They're the ones that throw the memes around and use terms like "lulz," and as long as they do their job, I don't really care.
But those I know who studied computer science are more likely to be able to talk with me about non-computer things, and I really appreciate that.
I make my living in technology, but my hobbies and interests are wide-ranging, and I don't always just want to talk about computers.
I also find that the university-trained computer scientists are more likely to be able to explain WHY they are doing what they're doing, why they made the design choices they did, and in general have a better understanding of the whole system rather than just doing things "they way they were taught" whether its the best or not.Of course, I realize this is all just anecdote and not just data, and I'm probably going to piss some people off by saying, however I will stand behind the notion that university-trained computer scientists are going to be easier and more fun to deal with than someone with a more myopic view of their "trade.
"Also, if you really want to get at why those with a 4-year degree from a "real" school get offered more and are picked first, its probably because those are the degrees that management understands, whether they understand the subject matter or not.
Management typically has a 4-year degree from a real school, and so they'd rather hire people with a piece of paper they "get" the value of.
Perhaps its an economic or educational prejudice, but such is life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30202828</id>
	<title>4 yr  tech easily</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258996260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been working in the software industry (embedded system, flight controls, verification) and can tell you I have never seen a tech college guy who was better than a good performing University student.</p><p>The reason I think is that getting through a University is tougher than a tech college.  Therefore only the most dedicated and intelligent make it through.</p><p>One final point.  If there is no difference and that University education wasn't a step beyond tech college, then by all means take night classes and graduate from the University.  You have the power...or you can come here and make a bunch of silly statements that the University students will agree with you to your face and chuckle at you inside.</p><p>Yes yes yes...you know your a better programmer than Mr. X.  You can find Universities that produce poor candidates...being a University grad is not a guarantee...it just is a good filter to eliminate most of the small fry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been working in the software industry ( embedded system , flight controls , verification ) and can tell you I have never seen a tech college guy who was better than a good performing University student.The reason I think is that getting through a University is tougher than a tech college .
Therefore only the most dedicated and intelligent make it through.One final point .
If there is no difference and that University education was n't a step beyond tech college , then by all means take night classes and graduate from the University .
You have the power...or you can come here and make a bunch of silly statements that the University students will agree with you to your face and chuckle at you inside.Yes yes yes...you know your a better programmer than Mr. X. You can find Universities that produce poor candidates...being a University grad is not a guarantee...it just is a good filter to eliminate most of the small fry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been working in the software industry (embedded system, flight controls, verification) and can tell you I have never seen a tech college guy who was better than a good performing University student.The reason I think is that getting through a University is tougher than a tech college.
Therefore only the most dedicated and intelligent make it through.One final point.
If there is no difference and that University education wasn't a step beyond tech college, then by all means take night classes and graduate from the University.
You have the power...or you can come here and make a bunch of silly statements that the University students will agree with you to your face and chuckle at you inside.Yes yes yes...you know your a better programmer than Mr. X.  You can find Universities that produce poor candidates...being a University grad is not a guarantee...it just is a good filter to eliminate most of the small fry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107668</id>
	<title>Someone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who doesn't have a liberal arts education, including all the sociology and other "useless" classes cannot possibly understand the tremendous value of a liberal arts education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who does n't have a liberal arts education , including all the sociology and other " useless " classes can not possibly understand the tremendous value of a liberal arts education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who doesn't have a liberal arts education, including all the sociology and other "useless" classes cannot possibly understand the tremendous value of a liberal arts education.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107832</id>
	<title>Blue collar, calloused hands, red neck</title>
	<author>littledannynolan</author>
	<datestamp>1258316940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am about as blue collar a developer as you can get.<br> <br>

Before I got into IT, I was a dock worker, a baker and a truck driver.<br> <br>

I supported myself driving a truck while I took a one year "Computer Programmer" course.<br> <br>

The differences in education are pronounced in junior developers, but by the time you get to intermediate and senior levels, where you went to school becomes far less important than how dedicated you are to your craft and improving your skills.<br> <br>

Pair programming, code reviews, and just generally working with people who are much better programmers / smarter people / better educated than I am has taught me far more than any courses I ever took.<br> <br>

Is there a stigma attached to my educational background?  Sometimes, but not often.  Mainly people care about your accomplishments and related experience often trumps education in a job search.<br> <br>

There is certainly something to be said for getting paid to learn on the job as opposed to paying to sit in a classroom.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am about as blue collar a developer as you can get .
Before I got into IT , I was a dock worker , a baker and a truck driver .
I supported myself driving a truck while I took a one year " Computer Programmer " course .
The differences in education are pronounced in junior developers , but by the time you get to intermediate and senior levels , where you went to school becomes far less important than how dedicated you are to your craft and improving your skills .
Pair programming , code reviews , and just generally working with people who are much better programmers / smarter people / better educated than I am has taught me far more than any courses I ever took .
Is there a stigma attached to my educational background ?
Sometimes , but not often .
Mainly people care about your accomplishments and related experience often trumps education in a job search .
There is certainly something to be said for getting paid to learn on the job as opposed to paying to sit in a classroom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am about as blue collar a developer as you can get.
Before I got into IT, I was a dock worker, a baker and a truck driver.
I supported myself driving a truck while I took a one year "Computer Programmer" course.
The differences in education are pronounced in junior developers, but by the time you get to intermediate and senior levels, where you went to school becomes far less important than how dedicated you are to your craft and improving your skills.
Pair programming, code reviews, and just generally working with people who are much better programmers / smarter people / better educated than I am has taught me far more than any courses I ever took.
Is there a stigma attached to my educational background?
Sometimes, but not often.
Mainly people care about your accomplishments and related experience often trumps education in a job search.
There is certainly something to be said for getting paid to learn on the job as opposed to paying to sit in a classroom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108022</id>
	<title>Wow! Blue collar programmers write great code?!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flame on MacBeth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flame on MacBeth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flame on MacBeth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107188</id>
	<title>It's about social status...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?"'</p><p>It's really a game of social status, education does NOT ensure someone is smarter or more skilled, it only ensures that, that person had the persistance or was a very good cheater.</p><p>Persistance and skill are often confused, the education system is really about handing out status to attempt to justify who gets jobs over who doesn't merit be damned.  Anyone who believes education is not mostly about social status is not very bright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Is n't being a developer about real skill level , not the piece of paper on the wall ?
" 'It 's really a game of social status , education does NOT ensure someone is smarter or more skilled , it only ensures that , that person had the persistance or was a very good cheater.Persistance and skill are often confused , the education system is really about handing out status to attempt to justify who gets jobs over who does n't merit be damned .
Anyone who believes education is not mostly about social status is not very bright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?
"'It's really a game of social status, education does NOT ensure someone is smarter or more skilled, it only ensures that, that person had the persistance or was a very good cheater.Persistance and skill are often confused, the education system is really about handing out status to attempt to justify who gets jobs over who doesn't merit be damned.
Anyone who believes education is not mostly about social status is not very bright.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116508</id>
	<title>"Coder"...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1258392420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...says it all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...says it all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...says it all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yes, the trick with the advance degree is that you learn in advance about them and when to know how to use them.  It also depends very much on what you end up doing at the end of it all,if you end up in a job where traditional search and sorting are your bread and butter you'll pick that up quickly, but not all jobs are like that.   Linked lists and sorting is a first and second year problem, Greedy algorithms, graph theory, (shortest path stuff), linear programming are 3rd year and so on.</p><p>I'm taking a grad course in machine learning, where we learn about the backpropogation algorithm (the first algorithm we talked about in class, in I think the first real lecture or maybe second).  If in highschool someone had told me go look up and use the backpropogation algorithm for something I could have.  But the guy with the degree is supposed to know which to use.  Oh and you know all those big O notations... well we have a grad course in algorithms which is all about trying to calculate the numerical coefficients in front of the n^2 or whatever.  In that case when they adverted the course to us, the prof gave this sample of two different implementations of the same O(n^2) sort, one had a coefficient of 1.7 the other was 2.something. Maybe important, maybe not.  Maybe more education in this case is diminishing returns, but then you don't offer more education to that many people.</p><p>All things that of course you can learn on your own, if it's important, if you have time.  The point of having the advanced degree person is they have taken the time, and may know other algorithms as well, and can direct the learning of the other people, who didn't have the time or if at the time it wasn't important.  Just the same when you're actually at a company not everyone has time to read the literature, someone has to read, and understand a lot of literature and filter down to the important stuff which is then sent off the relevant people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , the trick with the advance degree is that you learn in advance about them and when to know how to use them .
It also depends very much on what you end up doing at the end of it all,if you end up in a job where traditional search and sorting are your bread and butter you 'll pick that up quickly , but not all jobs are like that .
Linked lists and sorting is a first and second year problem , Greedy algorithms , graph theory , ( shortest path stuff ) , linear programming are 3rd year and so on.I 'm taking a grad course in machine learning , where we learn about the backpropogation algorithm ( the first algorithm we talked about in class , in I think the first real lecture or maybe second ) .
If in highschool someone had told me go look up and use the backpropogation algorithm for something I could have .
But the guy with the degree is supposed to know which to use .
Oh and you know all those big O notations... well we have a grad course in algorithms which is all about trying to calculate the numerical coefficients in front of the n ^ 2 or whatever .
In that case when they adverted the course to us , the prof gave this sample of two different implementations of the same O ( n ^ 2 ) sort , one had a coefficient of 1.7 the other was 2.something .
Maybe important , maybe not .
Maybe more education in this case is diminishing returns , but then you do n't offer more education to that many people.All things that of course you can learn on your own , if it 's important , if you have time .
The point of having the advanced degree person is they have taken the time , and may know other algorithms as well , and can direct the learning of the other people , who did n't have the time or if at the time it was n't important .
Just the same when you 're actually at a company not everyone has time to read the literature , someone has to read , and understand a lot of literature and filter down to the important stuff which is then sent off the relevant people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, the trick with the advance degree is that you learn in advance about them and when to know how to use them.
It also depends very much on what you end up doing at the end of it all,if you end up in a job where traditional search and sorting are your bread and butter you'll pick that up quickly, but not all jobs are like that.
Linked lists and sorting is a first and second year problem, Greedy algorithms, graph theory, (shortest path stuff), linear programming are 3rd year and so on.I'm taking a grad course in machine learning, where we learn about the backpropogation algorithm (the first algorithm we talked about in class, in I think the first real lecture or maybe second).
If in highschool someone had told me go look up and use the backpropogation algorithm for something I could have.
But the guy with the degree is supposed to know which to use.
Oh and you know all those big O notations... well we have a grad course in algorithms which is all about trying to calculate the numerical coefficients in front of the n^2 or whatever.
In that case when they adverted the course to us, the prof gave this sample of two different implementations of the same O(n^2) sort, one had a coefficient of 1.7 the other was 2.something.
Maybe important, maybe not.
Maybe more education in this case is diminishing returns, but then you don't offer more education to that many people.All things that of course you can learn on your own, if it's important, if you have time.
The point of having the advanced degree person is they have taken the time, and may know other algorithms as well, and can direct the learning of the other people, who didn't have the time or if at the time it wasn't important.
Just the same when you're actually at a company not everyone has time to read the literature, someone has to read, and understand a lot of literature and filter down to the important stuff which is then sent off the relevant people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109594</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Renegrade</author>
	<datestamp>1258284720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How does one "queue" awkward silence?
</p></div><p>AddTail(&amp;Queue,&amp;AwkwardSilence); ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does one " queue " awkward silence ?
AddTail ( &amp;Queue,&amp;AwkwardSilence ) ; ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does one "queue" awkward silence?
AddTail(&amp;Queue,&amp;AwkwardSilence); ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108388</id>
	<title>Re:White collar coders make better sheep</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258276560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've found that blue collar coders are like the blue collar technicians in any industry - an undisciplined lot that squawks a lot about how "things ain't right" but in the end, they never change anything because they neither have the balls nor the influence.  White collar guys actually manage to affect change when they need to because back in school, they learned critical thinking skills and how to apply them.</p><p>See what I did there?</p><p>Anybody can write shit to make others look bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found that blue collar coders are like the blue collar technicians in any industry - an undisciplined lot that squawks a lot about how " things ai n't right " but in the end , they never change anything because they neither have the balls nor the influence .
White collar guys actually manage to affect change when they need to because back in school , they learned critical thinking skills and how to apply them.See what I did there ? Anybody can write shit to make others look bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found that blue collar coders are like the blue collar technicians in any industry - an undisciplined lot that squawks a lot about how "things ain't right" but in the end, they never change anything because they neither have the balls nor the influence.
White collar guys actually manage to affect change when they need to because back in school, they learned critical thinking skills and how to apply them.See what I did there?Anybody can write shit to make others look bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108374</id>
	<title>Gray collar</title>
	<author>viljun</author>
	<datestamp>1258276440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The most working code is achieved when you get your collar gray. If you do the real user job with real users you'll immedeately notice things that suck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The most working code is achieved when you get your collar gray .
If you do the real user job with real users you 'll immedeately notice things that suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most working code is achieved when you get your collar gray.
If you do the real user job with real users you'll immedeately notice things that suck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108838</id>
	<title>Re:then you're not a real developer</title>
	<author>Gonoff</author>
	<datestamp>1258279200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We should expect different styles and standards of communication from those whose first language is not our own brand of english.</p><p>As a Brit, I find Indian &amp; Pakistani english sometimes uses surprising analogies &amp; similes.  The ones from the far side of the Atlantic are less surprising, but that could be because of TV and films.</p><p>
Rather than criticise someone from say Poland for poor grammatical style, I just consider that their english is better than my polish.  If I can understand what they have said, then it has fulfilled its purpose.  Someone from the same place as me has less excuse for ignorane of the language we both grew up with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We should expect different styles and standards of communication from those whose first language is not our own brand of english.As a Brit , I find Indian &amp; Pakistani english sometimes uses surprising analogies &amp; similes .
The ones from the far side of the Atlantic are less surprising , but that could be because of TV and films .
Rather than criticise someone from say Poland for poor grammatical style , I just consider that their english is better than my polish .
If I can understand what they have said , then it has fulfilled its purpose .
Someone from the same place as me has less excuse for ignorane of the language we both grew up with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We should expect different styles and standards of communication from those whose first language is not our own brand of english.As a Brit, I find Indian &amp; Pakistani english sometimes uses surprising analogies &amp; similes.
The ones from the far side of the Atlantic are less surprising, but that could be because of TV and films.
Rather than criticise someone from say Poland for poor grammatical style, I just consider that their english is better than my polish.
If I can understand what they have said, then it has fulfilled its purpose.
Someone from the same place as me has less excuse for ignorane of the language we both grew up with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107400</id>
	<title>Multilateral development</title>
	<author>gr8dude</author>
	<datestamp>1258314240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By exposing one's brain to information from different fields you teach them to see a problem from more than one perspective. They can understand the problem better that way. This gives them the advantage of being able to apply knowledge from other fields when designing their software.</p><p>It may not be obvious, or easy to measure, but I believe that my exposure to psychology, philosophy, and foreign languages results in the generation of pretty interesting ideas and solutions in the world of software. In the same manner, my technical background gives me advantages (or at least it gives my work a unique touch) when dealing with "humanistic things".</p><p>Of course, you don't necessarily have to go to a university to achieve the same effect, you can read books, talk to people, participate in discussions, and so on.</p><p>p.s. the summary is biased: "focus purely on writing \_great\_ software". The focus is on writing software, whether it is great or not - that's a different question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By exposing one 's brain to information from different fields you teach them to see a problem from more than one perspective .
They can understand the problem better that way .
This gives them the advantage of being able to apply knowledge from other fields when designing their software.It may not be obvious , or easy to measure , but I believe that my exposure to psychology , philosophy , and foreign languages results in the generation of pretty interesting ideas and solutions in the world of software .
In the same manner , my technical background gives me advantages ( or at least it gives my work a unique touch ) when dealing with " humanistic things " .Of course , you do n't necessarily have to go to a university to achieve the same effect , you can read books , talk to people , participate in discussions , and so on.p.s .
the summary is biased : " focus purely on writing \ _great \ _ software " .
The focus is on writing software , whether it is great or not - that 's a different question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By exposing one's brain to information from different fields you teach them to see a problem from more than one perspective.
They can understand the problem better that way.
This gives them the advantage of being able to apply knowledge from other fields when designing their software.It may not be obvious, or easy to measure, but I believe that my exposure to psychology, philosophy, and foreign languages results in the generation of pretty interesting ideas and solutions in the world of software.
In the same manner, my technical background gives me advantages (or at least it gives my work a unique touch) when dealing with "humanistic things".Of course, you don't necessarily have to go to a university to achieve the same effect, you can read books, talk to people, participate in discussions, and so on.p.s.
the summary is biased: "focus purely on writing \_great\_ software".
The focus is on writing software, whether it is great or not - that's a different question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114474</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>JoeMerchant</author>
	<datestamp>1258382160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.</p></div><p>When did you ever "need" to use mandelbrot?  What did that job pay?  I ask because I'd love to make money doing that sort of thing, but have never found anyone who cares enough to pay for it.  I did have a few professors in University who were impressed / intrigued with riffs on mandelbrot, etc., but effectively, I was paying them...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can use doubly linked lists , sort algorithms , mandelbrot , etc. , because when I needed them I learned how to use them.When did you ever " need " to use mandelbrot ?
What did that job pay ?
I ask because I 'd love to make money doing that sort of thing , but have never found anyone who cares enough to pay for it .
I did have a few professors in University who were impressed / intrigued with riffs on mandelbrot , etc. , but effectively , I was paying them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.When did you ever "need" to use mandelbrot?
What did that job pay?
I ask because I'd love to make money doing that sort of thing, but have never found anyone who cares enough to pay for it.
I did have a few professors in University who were impressed / intrigued with riffs on mandelbrot, etc., but effectively, I was paying them...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108502</id>
	<title>Or speaking from a systems perspective</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1258277220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give me someone who can understand systems beyond just lines of code on a page.  I come from the systems arena.  It surprises me the number of CS students, with 4-year degrees, that can't set up a simple web server.  I've had the best luck with folks who had a 2 year degree, had worked as a technical grunt for a couple years, and then are going on for a 4-year degree.  They tend to have the right combination of experience and motivation.  For whatever reason, they seem to enjoy toying around with systems, and when they learn something in the class room they can apply to their job, they're excited.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give me someone who can understand systems beyond just lines of code on a page .
I come from the systems arena .
It surprises me the number of CS students , with 4-year degrees , that ca n't set up a simple web server .
I 've had the best luck with folks who had a 2 year degree , had worked as a technical grunt for a couple years , and then are going on for a 4-year degree .
They tend to have the right combination of experience and motivation .
For whatever reason , they seem to enjoy toying around with systems , and when they learn something in the class room they can apply to their job , they 're excited .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give me someone who can understand systems beyond just lines of code on a page.
I come from the systems arena.
It surprises me the number of CS students, with 4-year degrees, that can't set up a simple web server.
I've had the best luck with folks who had a 2 year degree, had worked as a technical grunt for a couple years, and then are going on for a 4-year degree.
They tend to have the right combination of experience and motivation.
For whatever reason, they seem to enjoy toying around with systems, and when they learn something in the class room they can apply to their job, they're excited.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109202</id>
	<title>Re:Important difference</title>
	<author>Software Geek</author>
	<datestamp>1258282020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience, software development calls for people who are both extremely competent and well rounded:<br>They need coding skills.<br>They need organizational skills.<br>They need communication skills.<br>They need to be able to take direction.<br>They need to be able to provide direction.<br>Most importantly, they need to be able to acquire a deep understanding of the project they are working on, so that they can build the right thing without (or in spite of) close supervision.<br>Needless to say, real people are not perfect.  You have to make do with the people available.  But you are almost always better off with a small, extremely skilled workforce than a large, poorly skilled one.<br>"Coders" are a complete waste of time.  "Developers" are almost always preferable.</p><p>With that said, degree of educational attainment is only loosely correlated with ability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , software development calls for people who are both extremely competent and well rounded : They need coding skills.They need organizational skills.They need communication skills.They need to be able to take direction.They need to be able to provide direction.Most importantly , they need to be able to acquire a deep understanding of the project they are working on , so that they can build the right thing without ( or in spite of ) close supervision.Needless to say , real people are not perfect .
You have to make do with the people available .
But you are almost always better off with a small , extremely skilled workforce than a large , poorly skilled one .
" Coders " are a complete waste of time .
" Developers " are almost always preferable.With that said , degree of educational attainment is only loosely correlated with ability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, software development calls for people who are both extremely competent and well rounded:They need coding skills.They need organizational skills.They need communication skills.They need to be able to take direction.They need to be able to provide direction.Most importantly, they need to be able to acquire a deep understanding of the project they are working on, so that they can build the right thing without (or in spite of) close supervision.Needless to say, real people are not perfect.
You have to make do with the people available.
But you are almost always better off with a small, extremely skilled workforce than a large, poorly skilled one.
"Coders" are a complete waste of time.
"Developers" are almost always preferable.With that said, degree of educational attainment is only loosely correlated with ability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107352</id>
	<title>who cares?</title>
	<author>brausch</author>
	<datestamp>1258314000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't care where a co-worker went to school, I just want to see his or her code and documentation and talk with them about the thought process that went into their work. Results matter. I've worked with PhDs from hot shot schools (CMU, MIT, etc) and I've worked with self taught folks. Both have been good and not good. The bottom line is who gets the work done, not who knows more theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care where a co-worker went to school , I just want to see his or her code and documentation and talk with them about the thought process that went into their work .
Results matter .
I 've worked with PhDs from hot shot schools ( CMU , MIT , etc ) and I 've worked with self taught folks .
Both have been good and not good .
The bottom line is who gets the work done , not who knows more theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care where a co-worker went to school, I just want to see his or her code and documentation and talk with them about the thought process that went into their work.
Results matter.
I've worked with PhDs from hot shot schools (CMU, MIT, etc) and I've worked with self taught folks.
Both have been good and not good.
The bottom line is who gets the work done, not who knows more theory.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107942</id>
	<title>typists of the world unite!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ultimately, ideas are much more valuable to a company than lines of code.  Even if a developer is hired as a production coder, the creativity and perspective they bring to a project have benefits both in the short term (ie on the project) and in the long term (ie as a person grows and shifts roles in an organization).</p><p>A person with a broader life experience arguably has a more expressive set of symbols and ideas with which to communicate and synthesize novel constructs that are valuable to corporations over time.  That experience doesn't have to be an academic one, but all else being the same, a broader academic degree has the potential to enable a broader creative perspective in the organizational setting.</p><p>In other words, corporations naturally seek to own your soul, not your sudoku solving skills and typistry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultimately , ideas are much more valuable to a company than lines of code .
Even if a developer is hired as a production coder , the creativity and perspective they bring to a project have benefits both in the short term ( ie on the project ) and in the long term ( ie as a person grows and shifts roles in an organization ) .A person with a broader life experience arguably has a more expressive set of symbols and ideas with which to communicate and synthesize novel constructs that are valuable to corporations over time .
That experience does n't have to be an academic one , but all else being the same , a broader academic degree has the potential to enable a broader creative perspective in the organizational setting.In other words , corporations naturally seek to own your soul , not your sudoku solving skills and typistry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ultimately, ideas are much more valuable to a company than lines of code.
Even if a developer is hired as a production coder, the creativity and perspective they bring to a project have benefits both in the short term (ie on the project) and in the long term (ie as a person grows and shifts roles in an organization).A person with a broader life experience arguably has a more expressive set of symbols and ideas with which to communicate and synthesize novel constructs that are valuable to corporations over time.
That experience doesn't have to be an academic one, but all else being the same, a broader academic degree has the potential to enable a broader creative perspective in the organizational setting.In other words, corporations naturally seek to own your soul, not your sudoku solving skills and typistry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107764</id>
	<title>Load of crap</title>
	<author>blackcoot</author>
	<datestamp>1258316580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I ever meet a person with DeVry / ITT / etc. "credentials" who has done any of the following:</p><p>(a) designed fully decentralized, distributed, scalable, robust, real-time systems and successfully implemented and deployed said systems in the real world<br>(b) built a compiler from the tokenizer up and understands every step of how code gets turned into bits and how those bits get executed on modern hardware<br>(c) had an opportunity to use Tarjan's disjoint union / find algorithms and can explain where those data structures / algorithms are appropriate</p><p>I'd be interested in hiring him/her. The problem is that I have yet to meet such a person, because DeVry / ITT / etc. are degree mills whose sole purpose is to get as many people to cross the lowest possible bar that could pass accreditation -- i.e. turn a profit. As a consequence, the DeVry / ITT / etc. grads that I've had the "pleasure" of working with all have very narrow and shallow areas of competency and essentially zero ability to work outside those areas. The benefit of a four year degree is that in spite of all the fluff:</p><p>(a) you have a far better opportunity to actually cover the full breadth of theory<br>(b) there is enough time to mature enough intellectually to start to grok the zen nature of the theory<br>(c) you can't really choose between theory and practice; you have to demonstrate a degree of proficiency in both</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I ever meet a person with DeVry / ITT / etc .
" credentials " who has done any of the following : ( a ) designed fully decentralized , distributed , scalable , robust , real-time systems and successfully implemented and deployed said systems in the real world ( b ) built a compiler from the tokenizer up and understands every step of how code gets turned into bits and how those bits get executed on modern hardware ( c ) had an opportunity to use Tarjan 's disjoint union / find algorithms and can explain where those data structures / algorithms are appropriateI 'd be interested in hiring him/her .
The problem is that I have yet to meet such a person , because DeVry / ITT / etc .
are degree mills whose sole purpose is to get as many people to cross the lowest possible bar that could pass accreditation -- i.e .
turn a profit .
As a consequence , the DeVry / ITT / etc .
grads that I 've had the " pleasure " of working with all have very narrow and shallow areas of competency and essentially zero ability to work outside those areas .
The benefit of a four year degree is that in spite of all the fluff : ( a ) you have a far better opportunity to actually cover the full breadth of theory ( b ) there is enough time to mature enough intellectually to start to grok the zen nature of the theory ( c ) you ca n't really choose between theory and practice ; you have to demonstrate a degree of proficiency in both</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I ever meet a person with DeVry / ITT / etc.
"credentials" who has done any of the following:(a) designed fully decentralized, distributed, scalable, robust, real-time systems and successfully implemented and deployed said systems in the real world(b) built a compiler from the tokenizer up and understands every step of how code gets turned into bits and how those bits get executed on modern hardware(c) had an opportunity to use Tarjan's disjoint union / find algorithms and can explain where those data structures / algorithms are appropriateI'd be interested in hiring him/her.
The problem is that I have yet to meet such a person, because DeVry / ITT / etc.
are degree mills whose sole purpose is to get as many people to cross the lowest possible bar that could pass accreditation -- i.e.
turn a profit.
As a consequence, the DeVry / ITT / etc.
grads that I've had the "pleasure" of working with all have very narrow and shallow areas of competency and essentially zero ability to work outside those areas.
The benefit of a four year degree is that in spite of all the fluff:(a) you have a far better opportunity to actually cover the full breadth of theory(b) there is enough time to mature enough intellectually to start to grok the zen nature of the theory(c) you can't really choose between theory and practice; you have to demonstrate a degree of proficiency in both</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108280</id>
	<title>Because</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1258275900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads? Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?</p></div><p>It has nothing to do with appearance or a piece of paper.  It's all about real skill and knowledge.  Vocational school kids aren't sufficiently well rounded to understand the fields they may be programming for.  AI programmers are often expected to take epistemology or some neurobiology.  CS students are almost always required to take a lot of hard science and mathematics courses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads ?
Is n't being a developer about real skill level , not the piece of paper on the wall ? It has nothing to do with appearance or a piece of paper .
It 's all about real skill and knowledge .
Vocational school kids are n't sufficiently well rounded to understand the fields they may be programming for .
AI programmers are often expected to take epistemology or some neurobiology .
CS students are almost always required to take a lot of hard science and mathematics courses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads?
Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?It has nothing to do with appearance or a piece of paper.
It's all about real skill and knowledge.
Vocational school kids aren't sufficiently well rounded to understand the fields they may be programming for.
AI programmers are often expected to take epistemology or some neurobiology.
CS students are almost always required to take a lot of hard science and mathematics courses.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</id>
	<title>proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>acidfast7</author>
	<datestamp>1258313280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Stopped reading here: "I noticed one of the guys who was all over the tech conversation was all of a sudden very quite."

Quite what? Please put some effort in! Seriously<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... ugh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(

I went to college, then to graduate school for a PhD, then did a postdoc, now run a research group.

Maybe I'm too picky<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stopped reading here : " I noticed one of the guys who was all over the tech conversation was all of a sudden very quite .
" Quite what ?
Please put some effort in !
Seriously ... ugh : ( I went to college , then to graduate school for a PhD , then did a postdoc , now run a research group .
Maybe I 'm too picky : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stopped reading here: "I noticed one of the guys who was all over the tech conversation was all of a sudden very quite.
"

Quite what?
Please put some effort in!
Seriously ... ugh :(

I went to college, then to graduate school for a PhD, then did a postdoc, now run a research group.
Maybe I'm too picky :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684</id>
	<title>then you're not a real developer</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1258316100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers. It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English. If you worked for me, I would probably personally escort you out the front door.</p><p>Communicating despite language barriers is an important skill. Certainly those on a team that can write clearly and concisely in English are valuable, and generally find it easier to move up in the ranks because they can become more visible to management with such skills. But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers .
It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English .
If you worked for me , I would probably personally escort you out the front door.Communicating despite language barriers is an important skill .
Certainly those on a team that can write clearly and concisely in English are valuable , and generally find it easier to move up in the ranks because they can become more visible to management with such skills .
But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers.
It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English.
If you worked for me, I would probably personally escort you out the front door.Communicating despite language barriers is an important skill.
Certainly those on a team that can write clearly and concisely in English are valuable, and generally find it easier to move up in the ranks because they can become more visible to management with such skills.
But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>hackerjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1258275660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you may not appreciate, as an engineering graduate, is that a computer science degree is a science degree, not an engineering degree. 2-year technical diploma programs are sometimes closer to engineering degrees than computer science generally is.</p><p>The (admittedly anecdotal) evidence I've seen is that at least at institutions local to me, engineering programs include training like project planning and estimation, teaching you to keep a log while you're investigating so you can double-check you covered all possibilities, as well as including several practical project courses. Computer science, on the other hand, while it does focus on math and the math behind logic, doesn't include all this practical training that's essential to your actual job as a programmer.</p><p>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who's interested in group theory, but not for someone I'm going to hire.</p><p>So while I'd rather work with someone who's had that rigor and practical knowledge drilled into them, there's no guarantee that's what you're getting when you hire a computer science bachelor's graduate. Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees, but then while we're at it maybe I could get a pony too..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you may not appreciate , as an engineering graduate , is that a computer science degree is a science degree , not an engineering degree .
2-year technical diploma programs are sometimes closer to engineering degrees than computer science generally is.The ( admittedly anecdotal ) evidence I 've seen is that at least at institutions local to me , engineering programs include training like project planning and estimation , teaching you to keep a log while you 're investigating so you can double-check you covered all possibilities , as well as including several practical project courses .
Computer science , on the other hand , while it does focus on math and the math behind logic , does n't include all this practical training that 's essential to your actual job as a programmer.I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C + + 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who 's interested in group theory , but not for someone I 'm going to hire.So while I 'd rather work with someone who 's had that rigor and practical knowledge drilled into them , there 's no guarantee that 's what you 're getting when you hire a computer science bachelor 's graduate .
Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees , but then while we 're at it maybe I could get a pony too. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you may not appreciate, as an engineering graduate, is that a computer science degree is a science degree, not an engineering degree.
2-year technical diploma programs are sometimes closer to engineering degrees than computer science generally is.The (admittedly anecdotal) evidence I've seen is that at least at institutions local to me, engineering programs include training like project planning and estimation, teaching you to keep a log while you're investigating so you can double-check you covered all possibilities, as well as including several practical project courses.
Computer science, on the other hand, while it does focus on math and the math behind logic, doesn't include all this practical training that's essential to your actual job as a programmer.I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who's interested in group theory, but not for someone I'm going to hire.So while I'd rather work with someone who's had that rigor and practical knowledge drilled into them, there's no guarantee that's what you're getting when you hire a computer science bachelor's graduate.
Which is why I think we need 4-year software engineering professional degrees, but then while we're at it maybe I could get a pony too..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109770</id>
	<title>My experience</title>
	<author>jonwil</author>
	<datestamp>1258286160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My experience is that employers (here in Australia at least) care less about paper on the wall and more about actual commercial experience. If you dont have at least 2 years commercial experience in whatever technology they are using, so many jobs are unavailable to you.<br>Where you GET the 2 years commercial experience I have no clue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My experience is that employers ( here in Australia at least ) care less about paper on the wall and more about actual commercial experience .
If you dont have at least 2 years commercial experience in whatever technology they are using , so many jobs are unavailable to you.Where you GET the 2 years commercial experience I have no clue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My experience is that employers (here in Australia at least) care less about paper on the wall and more about actual commercial experience.
If you dont have at least 2 years commercial experience in whatever technology they are using, so many jobs are unavailable to you.Where you GET the 2 years commercial experience I have no clue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107850</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1258317000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Is that solely a US thing?</i>
<br>
<br>
Not solely I'd guess, but it's definitely a US thing.  Probably the reason a US degree is 4 years instead of 3.  Personally I liked immersing myself in advanced classes in a wide variety of subjects and would have hated only having to stick with one subject.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that solely a US thing ?
Not solely I 'd guess , but it 's definitely a US thing .
Probably the reason a US degree is 4 years instead of 3 .
Personally I liked immersing myself in advanced classes in a wide variety of subjects and would have hated only having to stick with one subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that solely a US thing?
Not solely I'd guess, but it's definitely a US thing.
Probably the reason a US degree is 4 years instead of 3.
Personally I liked immersing myself in advanced classes in a wide variety of subjects and would have hated only having to stick with one subject.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111948</id>
	<title>Re:What? You can't be both?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258305960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I learned programming for $100 in books from Borders.<br>Within 3 months, I was pulling in $75k a year and now I make a salary that's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractor</p></div><p>Gee, that's twice what you were making in <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1119209&amp;cid=26760375" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">February</a> [slashdot.org].  Not bad in this economy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I learned programming for $ 100 in books from Borders.Within 3 months , I was pulling in $ 75k a year and now I make a salary that 's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractorGee , that 's twice what you were making in February [ slashdot.org ] .
Not bad in this economy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I learned programming for $100 in books from Borders.Within 3 months, I was pulling in $75k a year and now I make a salary that's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractorGee, that's twice what you were making in February [slashdot.org].
Not bad in this economy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107602</id>
	<title>Oh god, CLASSIC!!!</title>
	<author>keepper</author>
	<datestamp>1258315440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I wanted to find out more about this author....</p><p><i>Eric Spiegel is CEO and co-founder of XTS, which provides software for planning, managing and auditing Citrix and other virtualization platforms.</i></p><p><i>This web site at www.xtsinc.com has been reported as an attack site and has been blocked based on your security preferences.</i></p><p>CLASSIC, so much for "smarter white collared developers"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>But I digress...</p><p>Look, plain and simple, in the field of software development, education means NOTHING.  Why you ask? because unlike true engineering, there are no globally studied curriculums. Now, you may argue about this all you want, but these are facts. CS programs vary so wildly, it's amazing.</p><p>Secondly, since most developers don't do any actually engineering, those core CS principles rarely come to play.</p><p>That being said, what matters is the individual. There  are huge differences from people that went to a tech school 'cause it was cool, someone that went to a top tier school, someone that dropped out ( for any of the reasons ), someone that went to a mediocre schoo, and someone that skipped college and just wanted to speed up their career.</p><p>But usually, those differences boil down more so to "candidate pools", and who they "mostly attract".</p><p>The good developers, come from all walks. They are the people that go beyond the taught knowledge ( wherever this knowledge may have come from ), and actually understand things from a raw, as close to true engineering perspective as possible, view.</p><p>But what do i know, I'm one of those that went to a top tier ivy, EE btw, and then decided to leave on his third year because it was too boring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I wanted to find out more about this author....Eric Spiegel is CEO and co-founder of XTS , which provides software for planning , managing and auditing Citrix and other virtualization platforms.This web site at www.xtsinc.com has been reported as an attack site and has been blocked based on your security preferences.CLASSIC , so much for " smarter white collared developers " ; ) But I digress...Look , plain and simple , in the field of software development , education means NOTHING .
Why you ask ?
because unlike true engineering , there are no globally studied curriculums .
Now , you may argue about this all you want , but these are facts .
CS programs vary so wildly , it 's amazing.Secondly , since most developers do n't do any actually engineering , those core CS principles rarely come to play.That being said , what matters is the individual .
There are huge differences from people that went to a tech school 'cause it was cool , someone that went to a top tier school , someone that dropped out ( for any of the reasons ) , someone that went to a mediocre schoo , and someone that skipped college and just wanted to speed up their career.But usually , those differences boil down more so to " candidate pools " , and who they " mostly attract " .The good developers , come from all walks .
They are the people that go beyond the taught knowledge ( wherever this knowledge may have come from ) , and actually understand things from a raw , as close to true engineering perspective as possible , view.But what do i know , I 'm one of those that went to a top tier ivy , EE btw , and then decided to leave on his third year because it was too boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I wanted to find out more about this author....Eric Spiegel is CEO and co-founder of XTS, which provides software for planning, managing and auditing Citrix and other virtualization platforms.This web site at www.xtsinc.com has been reported as an attack site and has been blocked based on your security preferences.CLASSIC, so much for "smarter white collared developers" ;)But I digress...Look, plain and simple, in the field of software development, education means NOTHING.
Why you ask?
because unlike true engineering, there are no globally studied curriculums.
Now, you may argue about this all you want, but these are facts.
CS programs vary so wildly, it's amazing.Secondly, since most developers don't do any actually engineering, those core CS principles rarely come to play.That being said, what matters is the individual.
There  are huge differences from people that went to a tech school 'cause it was cool, someone that went to a top tier school, someone that dropped out ( for any of the reasons ), someone that went to a mediocre schoo, and someone that skipped college and just wanted to speed up their career.But usually, those differences boil down more so to "candidate pools", and who they "mostly attract".The good developers, come from all walks.
They are the people that go beyond the taught knowledge ( wherever this knowledge may have come from ), and actually understand things from a raw, as close to true engineering perspective as possible, view.But what do i know, I'm one of those that went to a top tier ivy, EE btw, and then decided to leave on his third year because it was too boring.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107704</id>
	<title>What the market will bear</title>
	<author>Doofus</author>
	<datestamp>1258316220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No offense is intended here, but there are - <b>in general</b> - significant differences between "blue collar" and "white collar" software and systems people.
<br> <br>
With respect to pay, the short answer and significant oversimplification: BA/BS | Master's | Doctorate means the holder can command a higher salary than those with a lesser degree in the job market in general.
<br> <br>
In debates such as this, when they've arisen on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., respondents often say "proof of persistence", "better grammar", any number of other reasons to reward more highly educated software people with higher salaries.  Some simple rules of economics hold; there are fewer people with BA/BS degrees than there are without; there are fewer people with Master's in any field of employ than there are people with BA/BS degrees;  etc.
<br> <br>
Positions that call for additional responsibility/skill may often allow an applicant to substitute "years of experience" for an advanced degree - for the same reason - there are fewer people in the potential pool with XX years of experience than there are people in the pool with 2 years of experience.
<br> <br>
Beyond this most basic reason (supply and demand), over 20 years in software and systems design, I have seen significant differences in abstract thinking, strategic design, forecasting &amp; preparation, etc. between more highly educated people and those who liked school "not so much".  Like anything else worth anything, you get out of your career what you put in.  Education is a significant input that differentiates some candidates from the great hordes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No offense is intended here , but there are - in general - significant differences between " blue collar " and " white collar " software and systems people .
With respect to pay , the short answer and significant oversimplification : BA/BS | Master 's | Doctorate means the holder can command a higher salary than those with a lesser degree in the job market in general .
In debates such as this , when they 've arisen on /. , respondents often say " proof of persistence " , " better grammar " , any number of other reasons to reward more highly educated software people with higher salaries .
Some simple rules of economics hold ; there are fewer people with BA/BS degrees than there are without ; there are fewer people with Master 's in any field of employ than there are people with BA/BS degrees ; etc .
Positions that call for additional responsibility/skill may often allow an applicant to substitute " years of experience " for an advanced degree - for the same reason - there are fewer people in the potential pool with XX years of experience than there are people in the pool with 2 years of experience .
Beyond this most basic reason ( supply and demand ) , over 20 years in software and systems design , I have seen significant differences in abstract thinking , strategic design , forecasting &amp; preparation , etc .
between more highly educated people and those who liked school " not so much " .
Like anything else worth anything , you get out of your career what you put in .
Education is a significant input that differentiates some candidates from the great hordes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No offense is intended here, but there are - in general - significant differences between "blue collar" and "white collar" software and systems people.
With respect to pay, the short answer and significant oversimplification: BA/BS | Master's | Doctorate means the holder can command a higher salary than those with a lesser degree in the job market in general.
In debates such as this, when they've arisen on /., respondents often say "proof of persistence", "better grammar", any number of other reasons to reward more highly educated software people with higher salaries.
Some simple rules of economics hold; there are fewer people with BA/BS degrees than there are without; there are fewer people with Master's in any field of employ than there are people with BA/BS degrees;  etc.
Positions that call for additional responsibility/skill may often allow an applicant to substitute "years of experience" for an advanced degree - for the same reason - there are fewer people in the potential pool with XX years of experience than there are people in the pool with 2 years of experience.
Beyond this most basic reason (supply and demand), over 20 years in software and systems design, I have seen significant differences in abstract thinking, strategic design, forecasting &amp; preparation, etc.
between more highly educated people and those who liked school "not so much".
Like anything else worth anything, you get out of your career what you put in.
Education is a significant input that differentiates some candidates from the great hordes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112036</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>coldtone</author>
	<datestamp>1258307040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30126614</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Hiro2k</author>
	<datestamp>1258489140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 4 year software engineering degree. The only downside to it is that I don't feel comfortable going into a CS graduate program.</p><p><a href="http://www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/Planes2000/InISC.htm" title="itesm.mx" rel="nofollow">http://www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/Planes2000/InISC.htm</a> [itesm.mx]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 4 year software engineering degree .
The only downside to it is that I do n't feel comfortable going into a CS graduate program.http : //www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/Planes2000/InISC.htm [ itesm.mx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 4 year software engineering degree.
The only downside to it is that I don't feel comfortable going into a CS graduate program.http://www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/Planes2000/InISC.htm [itesm.mx]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107874</id>
	<title>White and blue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My background falls under the blue collar category. It was a very fast, high pressure, two year course which tried to cram a lot of languages, structures, approaches into us. It worked pretty well in that I think anyone who graduated could learn any other language or approach very quickly. We learned to write usable code under strict deadlines, which was handy.</p><p>A while ago I had the chance to talk with a fellow who was finishing his white collar degree. Four years of university. He was really well versed in different methods, structures and theories. On the other hand, when i asked him which languages he could write in, his response was "Java". "And?" "Just Java". In two years I'd picked up something like eight languages and about 90\% of his theory and in four he'd done a bit more theory and one language. Honestly, I'm not sure which of us was better off, or which of us would make a better programmer (I'm guessing he'd be a lot better at Java). But it was interesting to see the different approaches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My background falls under the blue collar category .
It was a very fast , high pressure , two year course which tried to cram a lot of languages , structures , approaches into us .
It worked pretty well in that I think anyone who graduated could learn any other language or approach very quickly .
We learned to write usable code under strict deadlines , which was handy.A while ago I had the chance to talk with a fellow who was finishing his white collar degree .
Four years of university .
He was really well versed in different methods , structures and theories .
On the other hand , when i asked him which languages he could write in , his response was " Java " .
" And ? " " Just Java " .
In two years I 'd picked up something like eight languages and about 90 \ % of his theory and in four he 'd done a bit more theory and one language .
Honestly , I 'm not sure which of us was better off , or which of us would make a better programmer ( I 'm guessing he 'd be a lot better at Java ) .
But it was interesting to see the different approaches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My background falls under the blue collar category.
It was a very fast, high pressure, two year course which tried to cram a lot of languages, structures, approaches into us.
It worked pretty well in that I think anyone who graduated could learn any other language or approach very quickly.
We learned to write usable code under strict deadlines, which was handy.A while ago I had the chance to talk with a fellow who was finishing his white collar degree.
Four years of university.
He was really well versed in different methods, structures and theories.
On the other hand, when i asked him which languages he could write in, his response was "Java".
"And?" "Just Java".
In two years I'd picked up something like eight languages and about 90\% of his theory and in four he'd done a bit more theory and one language.
Honestly, I'm not sure which of us was better off, or which of us would make a better programmer (I'm guessing he'd be a lot better at Java).
But it was interesting to see the different approaches.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108246</id>
	<title>I can tell...</title>
	<author>Taulin</author>
	<datestamp>1258275720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not going to argue if college makes you a better coder or not, but I can say, from experience working in multiple states, companies and countries, that I can always tell the difference between a college educated programmer/person and not. Just as many people understand, college exposes you to everything, or at least it should.  It is the wise ones that understand how to take that knowledge and apply it to their lives and jobs.  Sure you can learn from reading a book, but you can learn a lot more adding in a classroom of fellow peers and a teacher to talk about and explore the topics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not going to argue if college makes you a better coder or not , but I can say , from experience working in multiple states , companies and countries , that I can always tell the difference between a college educated programmer/person and not .
Just as many people understand , college exposes you to everything , or at least it should .
It is the wise ones that understand how to take that knowledge and apply it to their lives and jobs .
Sure you can learn from reading a book , but you can learn a lot more adding in a classroom of fellow peers and a teacher to talk about and explore the topics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not going to argue if college makes you a better coder or not, but I can say, from experience working in multiple states, companies and countries, that I can always tell the difference between a college educated programmer/person and not.
Just as many people understand, college exposes you to everything, or at least it should.
It is the wise ones that understand how to take that knowledge and apply it to their lives and jobs.
Sure you can learn from reading a book, but you can learn a lot more adding in a classroom of fellow peers and a teacher to talk about and explore the topics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107694</id>
	<title>Do you know G&#246;del Hoare Church Turing?</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1258316160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least roughly,<br>And what their work means for your programs?</p><p>If not, perhaps you need some "book larnin'"<br>before rolling up your sleeves and hitting<br>the keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least roughly,And what their work means for your programs ? If not , perhaps you need some " book larnin ' " before rolling up your sleeves and hittingthe keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least roughly,And what their work means for your programs?If not, perhaps you need some "book larnin'"before rolling up your sleeves and hittingthe keyboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107626</id>
	<title>Re:Slaves wear collars</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1258315740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I code in the nude, you insensitive clod!!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I code in the nude , you insensitive clod ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I code in the nude, you insensitive clod!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107444</id>
	<title>4 years of college not about piece of paper either</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads? Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Isn't being a four-year grad about having gone to college for four years, not the piece of paper on the wall? Like you said, they study other things like history and sociology.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads ?
Is n't being a developer about real skill level , not the piece of paper on the wall ?
Is n't being a four-year grad about having gone to college for four years , not the piece of paper on the wall ?
Like you said , they study other things like history and sociology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the software industry keep emphasizing this difference -- and generally giving better pay to four-year grads?
Isn't being a developer about real skill level, not the piece of paper on the wall?
Isn't being a four-year grad about having gone to college for four years, not the piece of paper on the wall?
Like you said, they study other things like history and sociology.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108018</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1258317720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;For example: "Queue awkward silence."</p><p>Maybe the author thinks "awkward silences" are supposed to line up?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; For example : " Queue awkward silence .
" Maybe the author thinks " awkward silences " are supposed to line up ?
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;For example: "Queue awkward silence.
"Maybe the author thinks "awkward silences" are supposed to line up?
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113432</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258369620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come on, the guy works "with" a "consulting firm".  Just smile and clap politely like when you're watching the special olympics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on , the guy works " with " a " consulting firm " .
Just smile and clap politely like when you 're watching the special olympics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on, the guy works "with" a "consulting firm".
Just smile and clap politely like when you're watching the special olympics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110192</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258289340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who's interested in group theory, but not for someone I'm going to hire.</p></div><p>...and you believed them?  I can only think of 1 or 2 classes in the whole computer science program I went to that didn't require coding.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>a computer science degree is a science degree, not an engineering degree</p></div><p>There are plenty of arguments that this isn't a bad thing.  Regardless, most computer science programs have been moving from the school of science to the school of engineering.  At least at all of the large universities in my state.</p><p>I do wish I had taken the software engineering course at my college that covered project planning type rigamroles.  It's not exactly fun, but it really should be required for a degree.  Honestly the same should go for a course on testing, debugging and QA.</p><p>Damn, I thought I gave you your pony and instead I ended up asking for 2 more...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C + + 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who 's interested in group theory , but not for someone I 'm going to hire....and you believed them ?
I can only think of 1 or 2 classes in the whole computer science program I went to that did n't require coding.a computer science degree is a science degree , not an engineering degreeThere are plenty of arguments that this is n't a bad thing .
Regardless , most computer science programs have been moving from the school of science to the school of engineering .
At least at all of the large universities in my state.I do wish I had taken the software engineering course at my college that covered project planning type rigamroles .
It 's not exactly fun , but it really should be required for a degree .
Honestly the same should go for a course on testing , debugging and QA.Damn , I thought I gave you your pony and instead I ended up asking for 2 more.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have contemporaries who tell me that beyond C++ 101 you can get through a CS degree without writing any code -- which is perhaps appropriate for an academic who's interested in group theory, but not for someone I'm going to hire....and you believed them?
I can only think of 1 or 2 classes in the whole computer science program I went to that didn't require coding.a computer science degree is a science degree, not an engineering degreeThere are plenty of arguments that this isn't a bad thing.
Regardless, most computer science programs have been moving from the school of science to the school of engineering.
At least at all of the large universities in my state.I do wish I had taken the software engineering course at my college that covered project planning type rigamroles.
It's not exactly fun, but it really should be required for a degree.
Honestly the same should go for a course on testing, debugging and QA.Damn, I thought I gave you your pony and instead I ended up asking for 2 more...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109642</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>jdigriz</author>
	<datestamp>1258285080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you don't know how to "queue awkward silence", you must not be much of a developer.  Use a FIFO man!</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't know how to " queue awkward silence " , you must not be much of a developer .
Use a FIFO man !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't know how to "queue awkward silence", you must not be much of a developer.
Use a FIFO man!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117708</id>
	<title>A bit of a simplification...</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1258396680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who has taken both a 4 year CS degree at a University and gotten a 1 year certificate at college I can offer the following perspective.</p><p>It depends on the school. The university I attended wasn't exactly well known for CS, but I think did a decent job. Some with more of an emphasis is CS will defiantly do better, while others will be much worse. College or vocational schools whatever you call them, are they same way. If you go to one that its focus is CS, it will likely be pretty good, if it isn't, well it will likely be very very bad. It depends of people. People are different, some are smart, some are not, others are lazy, and some have good work ethic. A 4 year degree gives at least some reassurance to an employer that the person is not dumb and lazy. It is by no means a sure thing, but it will weed out a lot. A challenging college or vocational school can do the same thing, in a short period of time, but I would say that you would have to know specifically which schools, and they would be few in number.</p><p>I found personally that University taught me how to write good code correctly, and college taught me to write code. Mind you the college was not a CS college. They were concerned about memorizing syntax (C++ and VB in this case) and getting your code to work than anything else. In university I might get marked for how optimized my code was, or if I used things like recursion properly. They also stressed the little things, like commenting, documenting, and planning (though I remember like many making my pretty little charts AFTER finishing the program). In college, so long as it worked there were pretty happy.</p><p>So I don&rsquo;t see anything out of the ordinary that people with 4 year degrees generally get paid more or hired more than people that don&rsquo;t, its pretty common sense. Does that mean that they are better at coding? That depends on you definition of "better at coding". That also assumes that all they ever want you for is coding. If they are looking for someone for the long term, as a company asset it is one thing. If they are looking for someone to fill a "job" then that is something else entirely.</p><p>Anyway, I think everyone should do both, though I know that can be a tall order.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who has taken both a 4 year CS degree at a University and gotten a 1 year certificate at college I can offer the following perspective.It depends on the school .
The university I attended was n't exactly well known for CS , but I think did a decent job .
Some with more of an emphasis is CS will defiantly do better , while others will be much worse .
College or vocational schools whatever you call them , are they same way .
If you go to one that its focus is CS , it will likely be pretty good , if it is n't , well it will likely be very very bad .
It depends of people .
People are different , some are smart , some are not , others are lazy , and some have good work ethic .
A 4 year degree gives at least some reassurance to an employer that the person is not dumb and lazy .
It is by no means a sure thing , but it will weed out a lot .
A challenging college or vocational school can do the same thing , in a short period of time , but I would say that you would have to know specifically which schools , and they would be few in number.I found personally that University taught me how to write good code correctly , and college taught me to write code .
Mind you the college was not a CS college .
They were concerned about memorizing syntax ( C + + and VB in this case ) and getting your code to work than anything else .
In university I might get marked for how optimized my code was , or if I used things like recursion properly .
They also stressed the little things , like commenting , documenting , and planning ( though I remember like many making my pretty little charts AFTER finishing the program ) .
In college , so long as it worked there were pretty happy.So I don    t see anything out of the ordinary that people with 4 year degrees generally get paid more or hired more than people that don    t , its pretty common sense .
Does that mean that they are better at coding ?
That depends on you definition of " better at coding " .
That also assumes that all they ever want you for is coding .
If they are looking for someone for the long term , as a company asset it is one thing .
If they are looking for someone to fill a " job " then that is something else entirely.Anyway , I think everyone should do both , though I know that can be a tall order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who has taken both a 4 year CS degree at a University and gotten a 1 year certificate at college I can offer the following perspective.It depends on the school.
The university I attended wasn't exactly well known for CS, but I think did a decent job.
Some with more of an emphasis is CS will defiantly do better, while others will be much worse.
College or vocational schools whatever you call them, are they same way.
If you go to one that its focus is CS, it will likely be pretty good, if it isn't, well it will likely be very very bad.
It depends of people.
People are different, some are smart, some are not, others are lazy, and some have good work ethic.
A 4 year degree gives at least some reassurance to an employer that the person is not dumb and lazy.
It is by no means a sure thing, but it will weed out a lot.
A challenging college or vocational school can do the same thing, in a short period of time, but I would say that you would have to know specifically which schools, and they would be few in number.I found personally that University taught me how to write good code correctly, and college taught me to write code.
Mind you the college was not a CS college.
They were concerned about memorizing syntax (C++ and VB in this case) and getting your code to work than anything else.
In university I might get marked for how optimized my code was, or if I used things like recursion properly.
They also stressed the little things, like commenting, documenting, and planning (though I remember like many making my pretty little charts AFTER finishing the program).
In college, so long as it worked there were pretty happy.So I don’t see anything out of the ordinary that people with 4 year degrees generally get paid more or hired more than people that don’t, its pretty common sense.
Does that mean that they are better at coding?
That depends on you definition of "better at coding".
That also assumes that all they ever want you for is coding.
If they are looking for someone for the long term, as a company asset it is one thing.
If they are looking for someone to fill a "job" then that is something else entirely.Anyway, I think everyone should do both, though I know that can be a tall order.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113736</id>
	<title>Some facts</title>
	<author>antivoid</author>
	<datestamp>1258374060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>okay, i'm going to just state facts about my career, and let you guys draw your own conclusions.
<br> <br>
Fact: i am well-experienced in PHP, ASP.net, C/C++, SQL, Html, JavaScript. I can code in Python/Django, I know VB6 and VB.net pretty well. I am coding an MMO, and I use Lua as a scripting language ingame (like WoW). I can even write batch files. I am a programmer from birth basically, coding since as far back as I can remember. Latest is Ruby on Rails, which I am finding really fun; training myself up there to get involved in the job market for Rails.
<br> <br>
Fact: I don't have a degree. Just some lameass 1 year college "Computer Science" diploma. It's not highly rated.
<br> <br>
Fact: I get turned down by some companies (many) because I don't have a degree. The larger the company, the higher the chance of being turned down due to lack of qualifications. Smaller companies don't seem to care for degrees. Why? Because degrees equate to larger salaries.
<br> <br>
Fact: Education institutions are sponsored. Many of them by Microsoft. In my country, a Computer Science Degree leaves you an ASP/Microsoft baby. Because Microsoft sponsors them. True educational freedom comes from learning what you want.

Fact: Very few educational institutions are going to teach you Ruby on Rails, for example.

Opinion: Degrees are for coding in the corporate ratrace. Self-tutoring is for true hardcore coding ninjas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>okay , i 'm going to just state facts about my career , and let you guys draw your own conclusions .
Fact : i am well-experienced in PHP , ASP.net , C/C + + , SQL , Html , JavaScript .
I can code in Python/Django , I know VB6 and VB.net pretty well .
I am coding an MMO , and I use Lua as a scripting language ingame ( like WoW ) .
I can even write batch files .
I am a programmer from birth basically , coding since as far back as I can remember .
Latest is Ruby on Rails , which I am finding really fun ; training myself up there to get involved in the job market for Rails .
Fact : I do n't have a degree .
Just some lameass 1 year college " Computer Science " diploma .
It 's not highly rated .
Fact : I get turned down by some companies ( many ) because I do n't have a degree .
The larger the company , the higher the chance of being turned down due to lack of qualifications .
Smaller companies do n't seem to care for degrees .
Why ? Because degrees equate to larger salaries .
Fact : Education institutions are sponsored .
Many of them by Microsoft .
In my country , a Computer Science Degree leaves you an ASP/Microsoft baby .
Because Microsoft sponsors them .
True educational freedom comes from learning what you want .
Fact : Very few educational institutions are going to teach you Ruby on Rails , for example .
Opinion : Degrees are for coding in the corporate ratrace .
Self-tutoring is for true hardcore coding ninjas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>okay, i'm going to just state facts about my career, and let you guys draw your own conclusions.
Fact: i am well-experienced in PHP, ASP.net, C/C++, SQL, Html, JavaScript.
I can code in Python/Django, I know VB6 and VB.net pretty well.
I am coding an MMO, and I use Lua as a scripting language ingame (like WoW).
I can even write batch files.
I am a programmer from birth basically, coding since as far back as I can remember.
Latest is Ruby on Rails, which I am finding really fun; training myself up there to get involved in the job market for Rails.
Fact: I don't have a degree.
Just some lameass 1 year college "Computer Science" diploma.
It's not highly rated.
Fact: I get turned down by some companies (many) because I don't have a degree.
The larger the company, the higher the chance of being turned down due to lack of qualifications.
Smaller companies don't seem to care for degrees.
Why? Because degrees equate to larger salaries.
Fact: Education institutions are sponsored.
Many of them by Microsoft.
In my country, a Computer Science Degree leaves you an ASP/Microsoft baby.
Because Microsoft sponsors them.
True educational freedom comes from learning what you want.
Fact: Very few educational institutions are going to teach you Ruby on Rails, for example.
Opinion: Degrees are for coding in the corporate ratrace.
Self-tutoring is for true hardcore coding ninjas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30120264</id>
	<title>Here we go again</title>
	<author>HeavensTrash</author>
	<datestamp>1258404480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't we get one of these every week or so?</p><p>Without reading the responses, here's the summary:</p><p>People with a degree: "Without a degree you won't understand proper theory and your code will suck."<br>People without a degree: "Most people with degrees are pompous and spend weeks documenting and planning a simple project."</p><p>Add in a few anecdotal experiences why one is better than the other, argument ensues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't we get one of these every week or so ? Without reading the responses , here 's the summary : People with a degree : " Without a degree you wo n't understand proper theory and your code will suck .
" People without a degree : " Most people with degrees are pompous and spend weeks documenting and planning a simple project .
" Add in a few anecdotal experiences why one is better than the other , argument ensues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't we get one of these every week or so?Without reading the responses, here's the summary:People with a degree: "Without a degree you won't understand proper theory and your code will suck.
"People without a degree: "Most people with degrees are pompous and spend weeks documenting and planning a simple project.
"Add in a few anecdotal experiences why one is better than the other, argument ensues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30125546</id>
	<title>I have blood in my stool...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258390080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and that's why I stay at home for the rest of my life and code what I want.</p><p>fuck your collar world... fuck you buzzwords... and have fun wearing your yellow badges in 2009, 2010, forever...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and that 's why I stay at home for the rest of my life and code what I want.fuck your collar world... fuck you buzzwords... and have fun wearing your yellow badges in 2009 , 2010 , forever.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and that's why I stay at home for the rest of my life and code what I want.fuck your collar world... fuck you buzzwords... and have fun wearing your yellow badges in 2009, 2010, forever...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms.  I don't have a degree, but I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.</p><p>You're not talking about trained vs. untrained, you're talking about stupid vs. intelligent, and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent, you can be stupid while still having a degree.</p><p>Which I think was the OPs point, masked in a thinly veiled class warfare reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The really good " untrained " programmers know where to look for the algorithms .
I do n't have a degree , but I can use doubly linked lists , sort algorithms , mandelbrot , etc. , because when I needed them I learned how to use them.You 're not talking about trained vs. untrained , you 're talking about stupid vs. intelligent , and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent , you can be stupid while still having a degree.Which I think was the OPs point , masked in a thinly veiled class warfare reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms.
I don't have a degree, but I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.You're not talking about trained vs. untrained, you're talking about stupid vs. intelligent, and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent, you can be stupid while still having a degree.Which I think was the OPs point, masked in a thinly veiled class warfare reference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107450</id>
	<title>Real skill is about applying real knowledge</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a college computer science professor at a 4-year liberal arts school, so there's my bias, but in my experience, it's the difference between knowing how a tool works and how the science behind a tool works.  If the tool breaks, or isn't right for the job, a background in algorithmic theory, software engineering, maths, perhaps graphics, and yes, programming languages (as in, how to build a compiler, not how to compile Ruby) is what makes the difference between someone who knows how to do their job, and someone who knows how to do their job by google-cut-and-pasting code.</p><p>I hate to say it like this, but the majority of students coming from 2-year schools simply aren't as prepared as their colleagues in the four-year universities.  It's not just about the other education that comes with liberal arts schools... it's because you do 4 years of study in computer science... you just formally learn fundamentally different things at deeper levels by more qualified people.  (Our department has 12 PhDs in a staff of 12 versus 1 guy with an MS at the local vocational college.)</p><p>Add to that 4 years of maths (which we require) 3 years of physics/chemistry (which we require), one full year of software engineering (which we require) and oh yeah, the history of world literature, studies of music, art, and history, etc. and what you get - grade for grade - is a better applicant.</p><p>-Clio</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a college computer science professor at a 4-year liberal arts school , so there 's my bias , but in my experience , it 's the difference between knowing how a tool works and how the science behind a tool works .
If the tool breaks , or is n't right for the job , a background in algorithmic theory , software engineering , maths , perhaps graphics , and yes , programming languages ( as in , how to build a compiler , not how to compile Ruby ) is what makes the difference between someone who knows how to do their job , and someone who knows how to do their job by google-cut-and-pasting code.I hate to say it like this , but the majority of students coming from 2-year schools simply are n't as prepared as their colleagues in the four-year universities .
It 's not just about the other education that comes with liberal arts schools... it 's because you do 4 years of study in computer science... you just formally learn fundamentally different things at deeper levels by more qualified people .
( Our department has 12 PhDs in a staff of 12 versus 1 guy with an MS at the local vocational college .
) Add to that 4 years of maths ( which we require ) 3 years of physics/chemistry ( which we require ) , one full year of software engineering ( which we require ) and oh yeah , the history of world literature , studies of music , art , and history , etc .
and what you get - grade for grade - is a better applicant.-Clio</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a college computer science professor at a 4-year liberal arts school, so there's my bias, but in my experience, it's the difference between knowing how a tool works and how the science behind a tool works.
If the tool breaks, or isn't right for the job, a background in algorithmic theory, software engineering, maths, perhaps graphics, and yes, programming languages (as in, how to build a compiler, not how to compile Ruby) is what makes the difference between someone who knows how to do their job, and someone who knows how to do their job by google-cut-and-pasting code.I hate to say it like this, but the majority of students coming from 2-year schools simply aren't as prepared as their colleagues in the four-year universities.
It's not just about the other education that comes with liberal arts schools... it's because you do 4 years of study in computer science... you just formally learn fundamentally different things at deeper levels by more qualified people.
(Our department has 12 PhDs in a staff of 12 versus 1 guy with an MS at the local vocational college.
)Add to that 4 years of maths (which we require) 3 years of physics/chemistry (which we require), one full year of software engineering (which we require) and oh yeah, the history of world literature, studies of music, art, and history, etc.
and what you get - grade for grade - is a better applicant.-Clio</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110896</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258295400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're saying the article is a complete troll?</p><p>It even looks like his grammar is intentionally fucked up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're saying the article is a complete troll ? It even looks like his grammar is intentionally fucked up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're saying the article is a complete troll?It even looks like his grammar is intentionally fucked up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112528</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For all intense and purposes, it would be quite easy to queue an awkward silence.</p><p>You simply read the data from your audio file, "awkwardSilence.wav", and place it in an audio queue buffer behind "mispelledCliche.wav".</p><p>Just wanted to nip this in the butt in one foul swoop if possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For all intense and purposes , it would be quite easy to queue an awkward silence.You simply read the data from your audio file , " awkwardSilence.wav " , and place it in an audio queue buffer behind " mispelledCliche.wav " .Just wanted to nip this in the butt in one foul swoop if possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all intense and purposes, it would be quite easy to queue an awkward silence.You simply read the data from your audio file, "awkwardSilence.wav", and place it in an audio queue buffer behind "mispelledCliche.wav".Just wanted to nip this in the butt in one foul swoop if possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109162</id>
	<title>why can't we all get along?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258281660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 4 year CS degree from an accredited Canadian university. I have a small team of developers that I work with.  I am the lead developer, but we function as equals more or less. Except on days when I'm in a bad mood.   I have been working since I graduated, almost 18 years ago, in this field of software development and have worked with dozens of developers who had degrees from canadian and US universities/colleges, as well as dozens who had no education at all in any formal setting, and dozens who had what we in Canada call "community college" or "trade-school" diplomas.</p><p>The difference between a university and a technical program at a community college is vanishing quickly in Canada, and it's only about 100 years too late, that it happened.   It is well known that university degrees help you land jobs, and it is also well known that university degrees do you almost no good, when it comes to really doing your job.   I use almost nothing that I learned in school, but the skills that I had, that enabled me to get into the school are the same skills that make me highly employable now.  In other words, it's not about what the piece of paper means (nothing), it's the fact that you were capable of getting the piece of paper that matters (and it doesn't matter that much, but it *is* something you accomplished, that definitely required intellectual capability, ambition, effort, money, and time).</p><p>I give people who apply to work with me some credit for being intelligent, if they have a computer science degree, because even the lamest of computer science degree programs still fails out some of the lame ducks who applied, and some of the lame ducks who got in, didn't finish.    I discard anyone from consideration who started out a University or College degree and gave up.   But I do not discard from consideration people who have a ticket to work as an Electrician and also happen to be ace programmers.  I expect them to have some blind spots, and some areas where they need to learn some of the formalisms and ideas that are communicated in the C/S curriculum, but there isn't one of those ideas that is so abstract and useless that it can't be learned on the job, as long as I don't need to train this person to be a software developer.</p><p>I hire and keep people based on their ability to write great code, debug code, and understand and read code, and their ability to use version control systems, to follow and create bug tracking and version/release management procedures, and their ability to ship software that works perfectly.</p><p>I think the original question implies a certain bug up someone's ass. Why didn't I get a job?  Well.   Maybe you're going to have to work harder to find a decent job if you skip the piece of paper.  So shut up and just work harder. You chose that path, or had that path shoved down your throat, but either way there isn't a whole lot you can do about it, other than to bust your ass, and make it work for you.</p><p>So, why can't we all just get along, eh?</p><p>Canadian Guy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 4 year CS degree from an accredited Canadian university .
I have a small team of developers that I work with .
I am the lead developer , but we function as equals more or less .
Except on days when I 'm in a bad mood .
I have been working since I graduated , almost 18 years ago , in this field of software development and have worked with dozens of developers who had degrees from canadian and US universities/colleges , as well as dozens who had no education at all in any formal setting , and dozens who had what we in Canada call " community college " or " trade-school " diplomas.The difference between a university and a technical program at a community college is vanishing quickly in Canada , and it 's only about 100 years too late , that it happened .
It is well known that university degrees help you land jobs , and it is also well known that university degrees do you almost no good , when it comes to really doing your job .
I use almost nothing that I learned in school , but the skills that I had , that enabled me to get into the school are the same skills that make me highly employable now .
In other words , it 's not about what the piece of paper means ( nothing ) , it 's the fact that you were capable of getting the piece of paper that matters ( and it does n't matter that much , but it * is * something you accomplished , that definitely required intellectual capability , ambition , effort , money , and time ) .I give people who apply to work with me some credit for being intelligent , if they have a computer science degree , because even the lamest of computer science degree programs still fails out some of the lame ducks who applied , and some of the lame ducks who got in , did n't finish .
I discard anyone from consideration who started out a University or College degree and gave up .
But I do not discard from consideration people who have a ticket to work as an Electrician and also happen to be ace programmers .
I expect them to have some blind spots , and some areas where they need to learn some of the formalisms and ideas that are communicated in the C/S curriculum , but there is n't one of those ideas that is so abstract and useless that it ca n't be learned on the job , as long as I do n't need to train this person to be a software developer.I hire and keep people based on their ability to write great code , debug code , and understand and read code , and their ability to use version control systems , to follow and create bug tracking and version/release management procedures , and their ability to ship software that works perfectly.I think the original question implies a certain bug up someone 's ass .
Why did n't I get a job ?
Well. Maybe you 're going to have to work harder to find a decent job if you skip the piece of paper .
So shut up and just work harder .
You chose that path , or had that path shoved down your throat , but either way there is n't a whole lot you can do about it , other than to bust your ass , and make it work for you.So , why ca n't we all just get along , eh ? Canadian Guy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 4 year CS degree from an accredited Canadian university.
I have a small team of developers that I work with.
I am the lead developer, but we function as equals more or less.
Except on days when I'm in a bad mood.
I have been working since I graduated, almost 18 years ago, in this field of software development and have worked with dozens of developers who had degrees from canadian and US universities/colleges, as well as dozens who had no education at all in any formal setting, and dozens who had what we in Canada call "community college" or "trade-school" diplomas.The difference between a university and a technical program at a community college is vanishing quickly in Canada, and it's only about 100 years too late, that it happened.
It is well known that university degrees help you land jobs, and it is also well known that university degrees do you almost no good, when it comes to really doing your job.
I use almost nothing that I learned in school, but the skills that I had, that enabled me to get into the school are the same skills that make me highly employable now.
In other words, it's not about what the piece of paper means (nothing), it's the fact that you were capable of getting the piece of paper that matters (and it doesn't matter that much, but it *is* something you accomplished, that definitely required intellectual capability, ambition, effort, money, and time).I give people who apply to work with me some credit for being intelligent, if they have a computer science degree, because even the lamest of computer science degree programs still fails out some of the lame ducks who applied, and some of the lame ducks who got in, didn't finish.
I discard anyone from consideration who started out a University or College degree and gave up.
But I do not discard from consideration people who have a ticket to work as an Electrician and also happen to be ace programmers.
I expect them to have some blind spots, and some areas where they need to learn some of the formalisms and ideas that are communicated in the C/S curriculum, but there isn't one of those ideas that is so abstract and useless that it can't be learned on the job, as long as I don't need to train this person to be a software developer.I hire and keep people based on their ability to write great code, debug code, and understand and read code, and their ability to use version control systems, to follow and create bug tracking and version/release management procedures, and their ability to ship software that works perfectly.I think the original question implies a certain bug up someone's ass.
Why didn't I get a job?
Well.   Maybe you're going to have to work harder to find a decent job if you skip the piece of paper.
So shut up and just work harder.
You chose that path, or had that path shoved down your throat, but either way there isn't a whole lot you can do about it, other than to bust your ass, and make it work for you.So, why can't we all just get along, eh?Canadian Guy</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108862</id>
	<title>What is a good programmer?</title>
	<author>DoctorJB</author>
	<datestamp>1258279380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That Doctor in my handle is a doctorate in computer science.</p><p>I'm a decent coder, and I work with those that are better, and by God I work with others that are worse.  Those that don't have as much formal training with coding usually can get the job done but often are a little too pragmatic and short-sighted.  While those that have a lot of formal training accidentally become architecture astronauts and make things too complicated in the goal of making things simple.</p><p>I don't know too many hiring managers that would prefer an egotistical genius over a team player that is willing to make things happen.  Code quality, saddly, doesn't matter.  In a simple interview or resume it's hard to tell if a person writes good code or bad--even in interviews that look at code.  Obfuscated or bad code can look clever and complicated so the author must have been smart since he understood it *cough*.  While good clean code looks so simple and obvious that it must not have been a hard problem *uh huh*.  A degree says that in theory the candidate has seen a lot of different types of problems and is probably a decent coder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That Doctor in my handle is a doctorate in computer science.I 'm a decent coder , and I work with those that are better , and by God I work with others that are worse .
Those that do n't have as much formal training with coding usually can get the job done but often are a little too pragmatic and short-sighted .
While those that have a lot of formal training accidentally become architecture astronauts and make things too complicated in the goal of making things simple.I do n't know too many hiring managers that would prefer an egotistical genius over a team player that is willing to make things happen .
Code quality , saddly , does n't matter .
In a simple interview or resume it 's hard to tell if a person writes good code or bad--even in interviews that look at code .
Obfuscated or bad code can look clever and complicated so the author must have been smart since he understood it * cough * .
While good clean code looks so simple and obvious that it must not have been a hard problem * uh huh * .
A degree says that in theory the candidate has seen a lot of different types of problems and is probably a decent coder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That Doctor in my handle is a doctorate in computer science.I'm a decent coder, and I work with those that are better, and by God I work with others that are worse.
Those that don't have as much formal training with coding usually can get the job done but often are a little too pragmatic and short-sighted.
While those that have a lot of formal training accidentally become architecture astronauts and make things too complicated in the goal of making things simple.I don't know too many hiring managers that would prefer an egotistical genius over a team player that is willing to make things happen.
Code quality, saddly, doesn't matter.
In a simple interview or resume it's hard to tell if a person writes good code or bad--even in interviews that look at code.
Obfuscated or bad code can look clever and complicated so the author must have been smart since he understood it *cough*.
While good clean code looks so simple and obvious that it must not have been a hard problem *uh huh*.
A degree says that in theory the candidate has seen a lot of different types of problems and is probably a decent coder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107320</id>
	<title>Some guy..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well its not just about the paper on the wall, there are much more factors that do differentiate a selfgrown developer from the degree one.</p><p>Some are historical as usual a degree was a sign of competence or at least in europe a sign of ability to learn and prioritize on your own. (In the times where univeristy was not that kind of crappy school like institiution it has become by adopting to the US like model of BA and MA).</p><p>Some "geeks" might be better coders, but lets face it: What is a good coder? The guy who is all about the newest language and the freakiest code or is it the persone who understands business and who is able to deliver quality and contribution to a team?</p><p>So at the end the decision about payment and hirement is a really different one than paper vs. no paper. Paper might only be the first filter factor if the resonation is just too high to a position. The decision is based on (priority)</p><p>- Team and social competence (Thats why it is so important to have the interview, guys)<br>- Experience. What has been achieved? In which field? What were the targets of the achievement?<br>- Brain. No matter what youvde done and studied you will never be a 100\% match for the company to hire you. Prove that you are able to learn, understand, adept quickly.(Maybe here the 4y shows some weight, as those people managed to educate themselves for 4 years and to learn, adept and understand new things though not always useful and meaningful)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well its not just about the paper on the wall , there are much more factors that do differentiate a selfgrown developer from the degree one.Some are historical as usual a degree was a sign of competence or at least in europe a sign of ability to learn and prioritize on your own .
( In the times where univeristy was not that kind of crappy school like institiution it has become by adopting to the US like model of BA and MA ) .Some " geeks " might be better coders , but lets face it : What is a good coder ?
The guy who is all about the newest language and the freakiest code or is it the persone who understands business and who is able to deliver quality and contribution to a team ? So at the end the decision about payment and hirement is a really different one than paper vs. no paper .
Paper might only be the first filter factor if the resonation is just too high to a position .
The decision is based on ( priority ) - Team and social competence ( Thats why it is so important to have the interview , guys ) - Experience .
What has been achieved ?
In which field ?
What were the targets of the achievement ? - Brain .
No matter what youvde done and studied you will never be a 100 \ % match for the company to hire you .
Prove that you are able to learn , understand , adept quickly .
( Maybe here the 4y shows some weight , as those people managed to educate themselves for 4 years and to learn , adept and understand new things though not always useful and meaningful )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well its not just about the paper on the wall, there are much more factors that do differentiate a selfgrown developer from the degree one.Some are historical as usual a degree was a sign of competence or at least in europe a sign of ability to learn and prioritize on your own.
(In the times where univeristy was not that kind of crappy school like institiution it has become by adopting to the US like model of BA and MA).Some "geeks" might be better coders, but lets face it: What is a good coder?
The guy who is all about the newest language and the freakiest code or is it the persone who understands business and who is able to deliver quality and contribution to a team?So at the end the decision about payment and hirement is a really different one than paper vs. no paper.
Paper might only be the first filter factor if the resonation is just too high to a position.
The decision is based on (priority)- Team and social competence (Thats why it is so important to have the interview, guys)- Experience.
What has been achieved?
In which field?
What were the targets of the achievement?- Brain.
No matter what youvde done and studied you will never be a 100\% match for the company to hire you.
Prove that you are able to learn, understand, adept quickly.
(Maybe here the 4y shows some weight, as those people managed to educate themselves for 4 years and to learn, adept and understand new things though not always useful and meaningful)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110960</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258296060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Slashdot, what the hell happened to you? You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack.</p><p>Smoking crack and *gaining* weight do not go hand-in-hand.  Let me fix that for you:</p><p>Slashdot, what the hell happened to you? You used to be interesting and hot, but you started smoking crack and giving random guys BJs in the back alley. I don't think I can do this anymore. It's hard to say, but I don't love you anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Slashdot , what the hell happened to you ?
You used to be interesting and hot , but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack.Smoking crack and * gaining * weight do not go hand-in-hand .
Let me fix that for you : Slashdot , what the hell happened to you ?
You used to be interesting and hot , but you started smoking crack and giving random guys BJs in the back alley .
I do n't think I can do this anymore .
It 's hard to say , but I do n't love you anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Slashdot, what the hell happened to you?
You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack.Smoking crack and *gaining* weight do not go hand-in-hand.
Let me fix that for you:Slashdot, what the hell happened to you?
You used to be interesting and hot, but you started smoking crack and giving random guys BJs in the back alley.
I don't think I can do this anymore.
It's hard to say, but I don't love you anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108184</id>
	<title>Re:Important difference</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258318620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd take a "coder" with 2 years experience and a 2 year voc degree vs a 4 year grad with no experience every time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd take a " coder " with 2 years experience and a 2 year voc degree vs a 4 year grad with no experience every time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd take a "coder" with 2 years experience and a 2 year voc degree vs a 4 year grad with no experience every time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30134610</id>
	<title>Four year graduates also study...</title>
	<author>gatkinso</author>
	<datestamp>1258451640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>calculus, physics, biology, chemistry, quantum mechanics, number theory...</p><p>I don't see alot of these offerings at so called vocational schools.</p><p>I guess this is why many (not all) vocational school student avoid hard engineering and science gigs (if they can get them at all).</p><p>The interview went fine and dandy right up until the hiring manager asked about the math behind laminar air flow, relevent because they are developing software that adapts aircraft flight surfaces in realtime to decrease fuel consumption (for example).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>calculus , physics , biology , chemistry , quantum mechanics , number theory...I do n't see alot of these offerings at so called vocational schools.I guess this is why many ( not all ) vocational school student avoid hard engineering and science gigs ( if they can get them at all ) .The interview went fine and dandy right up until the hiring manager asked about the math behind laminar air flow , relevent because they are developing software that adapts aircraft flight surfaces in realtime to decrease fuel consumption ( for example ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>calculus, physics, biology, chemistry, quantum mechanics, number theory...I don't see alot of these offerings at so called vocational schools.I guess this is why many (not all) vocational school student avoid hard engineering and science gigs (if they can get them at all).The interview went fine and dandy right up until the hiring manager asked about the math behind laminar air flow, relevent because they are developing software that adapts aircraft flight surfaces in realtime to decrease fuel consumption (for example).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113134</id>
	<title>Wait, you studied less than 4 years for a degree?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258365060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I studied 6 years for my Math/CS degree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I studied 6 years for my Math/CS degree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I studied 6 years for my Math/CS degree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115390</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Aceticon</author>
	<datestamp>1258387200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point of the parent is that in <b>real</b> life the likelihood of a Software Engineer to have to implement their own algorithm is as close to zero as to be statistically insignificant.</p><p>Most of the time, you're a lot more likely to, and will get much bigger performance improvements from:<br>- Architectural/Design decisions aiming at boosting performance (i.e. things like distributed processing, memory caches, file caches, streaming processing instead of bulk processing and others)<br>- SQL query optimization.<br>- Teaching junior developers to avoid traditional performance pitfalls.<br>- Dedicating 10\% of your time to find and improve those bits of a system that take 90\% of the time in a process (often enough these are things like I/O and needless database access, which have very little to do with algorithms).</p><p>None of this is taught in Universities.</p><p>I still remember lots of really cool things I learned while taking a Degree, a couple of which have even proven useful when I least expected it. That said, the only really useful thing I came out of University with was the ability to learn things fast - something many people can pick-up on the job.</p><p>For all the coolness factor in learning Neural Networks, I current work with at least 2 other people that have learned it also (even one that has a Masters on it) and <b>none of us</b> does anything remotely related to it or is likely to ever do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point of the parent is that in real life the likelihood of a Software Engineer to have to implement their own algorithm is as close to zero as to be statistically insignificant.Most of the time , you 're a lot more likely to , and will get much bigger performance improvements from : - Architectural/Design decisions aiming at boosting performance ( i.e .
things like distributed processing , memory caches , file caches , streaming processing instead of bulk processing and others ) - SQL query optimization.- Teaching junior developers to avoid traditional performance pitfalls.- Dedicating 10 \ % of your time to find and improve those bits of a system that take 90 \ % of the time in a process ( often enough these are things like I/O and needless database access , which have very little to do with algorithms ) .None of this is taught in Universities.I still remember lots of really cool things I learned while taking a Degree , a couple of which have even proven useful when I least expected it .
That said , the only really useful thing I came out of University with was the ability to learn things fast - something many people can pick-up on the job.For all the coolness factor in learning Neural Networks , I current work with at least 2 other people that have learned it also ( even one that has a Masters on it ) and none of us does anything remotely related to it or is likely to ever do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point of the parent is that in real life the likelihood of a Software Engineer to have to implement their own algorithm is as close to zero as to be statistically insignificant.Most of the time, you're a lot more likely to, and will get much bigger performance improvements from:- Architectural/Design decisions aiming at boosting performance (i.e.
things like distributed processing, memory caches, file caches, streaming processing instead of bulk processing and others)- SQL query optimization.- Teaching junior developers to avoid traditional performance pitfalls.- Dedicating 10\% of your time to find and improve those bits of a system that take 90\% of the time in a process (often enough these are things like I/O and needless database access, which have very little to do with algorithms).None of this is taught in Universities.I still remember lots of really cool things I learned while taking a Degree, a couple of which have even proven useful when I least expected it.
That said, the only really useful thing I came out of University with was the ability to learn things fast - something many people can pick-up on the job.For all the coolness factor in learning Neural Networks, I current work with at least 2 other people that have learned it also (even one that has a Masters on it) and none of us does anything remotely related to it or is likely to ever do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107498</id>
	<title>Doing things you don't enjoy under stress</title>
	<author>roman\_mir</author>
	<datestamp>1258314840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I loved programming since a very young age and did it on paper before even having access to a computer, so when I applied to a few universities it was only because it probably was expected that I should do so.  By the end of the first year I got a job putting bills online for a telco site, just a bit over minimum wage, but I only was able to land that position because I was at the university (there were about 60 people trying to get that position and the reason I got it was only because I came to the interview with a magazine, sharing my excitement over some new development in an Intel CPU with the interviewer).</p><p>Now I gave some thought - did it really matter, going to a university, would it have been different if I just took vocational training?  The answer is yes.  It was a correct decision going with a university even though it was so expensive (I paid for all tuition, living, books myself by working all the way through the 5 years, which I did instead of 4, because I decided to go slower but around the year, summer and all.)</p><p>It was better for me - I was already able to code in more than one language, I built my own software similar to lotus/excel without ever even seeing something like that before in my life.  Built games, word processors, tools, drivers etc. for myself just because it was interesting.  So from point of view of a trade I could do it without any further training.</p><p>However the university gave me something I didn't have: 1. Doing things I didn't like anyway while under stress (all of those extra courses that TFA is complaining about). 2. Finding out about the math of the subject, which I would not have otherwise done myself, because it's not that crazy fun (for me at least), but since I had to pay for my education I had no choice but to do what was needed or lose the money with nothing to show for it.  3. I got myself 2 educations to get the B.Sc. , a major and a minor, and my minor was actually interesting to me as well - astronomy.  4.  I was forced to study all by myself, while my university has a good enough reputation, it's not a school where you are just given stuff to do and you are good as long as you do it.  There we had to push ourselves, the profs really hated teaching and most were terrible at it, while the exams were a bitch.</p><p>It was worth it, would do again if given a choice but would definitely change a few things, like not trying to overload myself that much in the first year, there should be time for some fun while doing all that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I loved programming since a very young age and did it on paper before even having access to a computer , so when I applied to a few universities it was only because it probably was expected that I should do so .
By the end of the first year I got a job putting bills online for a telco site , just a bit over minimum wage , but I only was able to land that position because I was at the university ( there were about 60 people trying to get that position and the reason I got it was only because I came to the interview with a magazine , sharing my excitement over some new development in an Intel CPU with the interviewer ) .Now I gave some thought - did it really matter , going to a university , would it have been different if I just took vocational training ?
The answer is yes .
It was a correct decision going with a university even though it was so expensive ( I paid for all tuition , living , books myself by working all the way through the 5 years , which I did instead of 4 , because I decided to go slower but around the year , summer and all .
) It was better for me - I was already able to code in more than one language , I built my own software similar to lotus/excel without ever even seeing something like that before in my life .
Built games , word processors , tools , drivers etc .
for myself just because it was interesting .
So from point of view of a trade I could do it without any further training.However the university gave me something I did n't have : 1 .
Doing things I did n't like anyway while under stress ( all of those extra courses that TFA is complaining about ) .
2. Finding out about the math of the subject , which I would not have otherwise done myself , because it 's not that crazy fun ( for me at least ) , but since I had to pay for my education I had no choice but to do what was needed or lose the money with nothing to show for it .
3. I got myself 2 educations to get the B.Sc .
, a major and a minor , and my minor was actually interesting to me as well - astronomy .
4. I was forced to study all by myself , while my university has a good enough reputation , it 's not a school where you are just given stuff to do and you are good as long as you do it .
There we had to push ourselves , the profs really hated teaching and most were terrible at it , while the exams were a bitch.It was worth it , would do again if given a choice but would definitely change a few things , like not trying to overload myself that much in the first year , there should be time for some fun while doing all that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loved programming since a very young age and did it on paper before even having access to a computer, so when I applied to a few universities it was only because it probably was expected that I should do so.
By the end of the first year I got a job putting bills online for a telco site, just a bit over minimum wage, but I only was able to land that position because I was at the university (there were about 60 people trying to get that position and the reason I got it was only because I came to the interview with a magazine, sharing my excitement over some new development in an Intel CPU with the interviewer).Now I gave some thought - did it really matter, going to a university, would it have been different if I just took vocational training?
The answer is yes.
It was a correct decision going with a university even though it was so expensive (I paid for all tuition, living, books myself by working all the way through the 5 years, which I did instead of 4, because I decided to go slower but around the year, summer and all.
)It was better for me - I was already able to code in more than one language, I built my own software similar to lotus/excel without ever even seeing something like that before in my life.
Built games, word processors, tools, drivers etc.
for myself just because it was interesting.
So from point of view of a trade I could do it without any further training.However the university gave me something I didn't have: 1.
Doing things I didn't like anyway while under stress (all of those extra courses that TFA is complaining about).
2. Finding out about the math of the subject, which I would not have otherwise done myself, because it's not that crazy fun (for me at least), but since I had to pay for my education I had no choice but to do what was needed or lose the money with nothing to show for it.
3. I got myself 2 educations to get the B.Sc.
, a major and a minor, and my minor was actually interesting to me as well - astronomy.
4.  I was forced to study all by myself, while my university has a good enough reputation, it's not a school where you are just given stuff to do and you are good as long as you do it.
There we had to push ourselves, the profs really hated teaching and most were terrible at it, while the exams were a bitch.It was worth it, would do again if given a choice but would definitely change a few things, like not trying to overload myself that much in the first year, there should be time for some fun while doing all that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116460</id>
	<title>Re:What? You can't be both?</title>
	<author>SageinaRage</author>
	<datestamp>1258392240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>None of this says that you're a good programmer, it just says that you're a good marketer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>None of this says that you 're a good programmer , it just says that you 're a good marketer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>None of this says that you're a good programmer, it just says that you're a good marketer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108194</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>blackcoot</author>
	<datestamp>1258318680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quick: who are Robert Tarjan, Edsgar Dijkstra, Robert Floyd and Stephen Warshall and why would you care about their work?</p><p>Which brings me to my point: if you don't know what you're looking for, all the references in the world are essentially useless to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quick : who are Robert Tarjan , Edsgar Dijkstra , Robert Floyd and Stephen Warshall and why would you care about their work ? Which brings me to my point : if you do n't know what you 're looking for , all the references in the world are essentially useless to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quick: who are Robert Tarjan, Edsgar Dijkstra, Robert Floyd and Stephen Warshall and why would you care about their work?Which brings me to my point: if you don't know what you're looking for, all the references in the world are essentially useless to you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116950</id>
	<title>Biased author</title>
	<author>JazzTao</author>
	<datestamp>1258394100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems like the author has a biased opinion that learning to program in a vocational school implies a more comprehensive and focused curriculum on computer science.
I disagree. I went to a 4 year uni, and although I did take many classes in physics and math, and not *just* programming, I also had four years of rigorous computer science curriculum; so much rigor, that I'm confident I learned more exhaustive CS and programming skills than others I've worked with from vocational schools have learned.

But nonetheless, I agree with the author, that the skills should speak for themselves</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like the author has a biased opinion that learning to program in a vocational school implies a more comprehensive and focused curriculum on computer science .
I disagree .
I went to a 4 year uni , and although I did take many classes in physics and math , and not * just * programming , I also had four years of rigorous computer science curriculum ; so much rigor , that I 'm confident I learned more exhaustive CS and programming skills than others I 've worked with from vocational schools have learned .
But nonetheless , I agree with the author , that the skills should speak for themselves</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like the author has a biased opinion that learning to program in a vocational school implies a more comprehensive and focused curriculum on computer science.
I disagree.
I went to a 4 year uni, and although I did take many classes in physics and math, and not *just* programming, I also had four years of rigorous computer science curriculum; so much rigor, that I'm confident I learned more exhaustive CS and programming skills than others I've worked with from vocational schools have learned.
But nonetheless, I agree with the author, that the skills should speak for themselves</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30128206</id>
	<title>low life scum</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258469580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blue collar programmers smell.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blue collar programmers smell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blue collar programmers smell.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</id>
	<title>From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>chrysrobyn</author>
	<datestamp>1258313700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a hardware engineer.  You want a real engineer for some design and most analysis tasks.  History and sociology don't play a part, but dedication to the profession and experience with the underlying principles behind observations are key.  A two year grad, or technician, is typically very good for a subset of design, along with a whole bunch of data acquisition.</p><p>I imagine code to be the same.  If you want high level stuff, architectures, in depth analysis, a full discussion of repercussions of coding choices, a 4 year computer scientist or software engineer is called for.  If all that stuff is already laid out and you just need someone to type in a pile of code to do a well defined task, a 2 year would be great.</p><p>It's not necessarily the stuff learned in the extra 2 years, but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that.  The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to "run with" and compete against.  College is rarely about the classes, although they're necessary and grades are the common barometer, but it's about the friends made and the level of competition -- you need to compete with people to learn better practices.</p><p>Of course, there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching, but separating them from the chaff (and overcoming their egos) is rarely worth the time in my experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a hardware engineer .
You want a real engineer for some design and most analysis tasks .
History and sociology do n't play a part , but dedication to the profession and experience with the underlying principles behind observations are key .
A two year grad , or technician , is typically very good for a subset of design , along with a whole bunch of data acquisition.I imagine code to be the same .
If you want high level stuff , architectures , in depth analysis , a full discussion of repercussions of coding choices , a 4 year computer scientist or software engineer is called for .
If all that stuff is already laid out and you just need someone to type in a pile of code to do a well defined task , a 2 year would be great.It 's not necessarily the stuff learned in the extra 2 years , but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that .
The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to " run with " and compete against .
College is rarely about the classes , although they 're necessary and grades are the common barometer , but it 's about the friends made and the level of competition -- you need to compete with people to learn better practices.Of course , there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching , but separating them from the chaff ( and overcoming their egos ) is rarely worth the time in my experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a hardware engineer.
You want a real engineer for some design and most analysis tasks.
History and sociology don't play a part, but dedication to the profession and experience with the underlying principles behind observations are key.
A two year grad, or technician, is typically very good for a subset of design, along with a whole bunch of data acquisition.I imagine code to be the same.
If you want high level stuff, architectures, in depth analysis, a full discussion of repercussions of coding choices, a 4 year computer scientist or software engineer is called for.
If all that stuff is already laid out and you just need someone to type in a pile of code to do a well defined task, a 2 year would be great.It's not necessarily the stuff learned in the extra 2 years, but the level of person it takes to invest in their future like that.
The 4 year colleges provide a different group of people to "run with" and compete against.
College is rarely about the classes, although they're necessary and grades are the common barometer, but it's about the friends made and the level of competition -- you need to compete with people to learn better practices.Of course, there are prodigies who can do excellent work with self teaching, but separating them from the chaff (and overcoming their egos) is rarely worth the time in my experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114360</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258380900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Additionally, knowing about algorithms helps if you need to slightly modify one to help in your specific case.  There are many cases where you might use 1 of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... well tons of sorting algorithms, but knowing how to tweak one over the other so that your case your O() isn't too bad...</p><p>Also being a software developer and being just a coder might get you a fair ways... but if you are going anywhere up I have seen huge differences when you take an engineer and make them a tech lead, and when you take a non-engineer and make them a tech lead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Additionally , knowing about algorithms helps if you need to slightly modify one to help in your specific case .
There are many cases where you might use 1 of ... well tons of sorting algorithms , but knowing how to tweak one over the other so that your case your O ( ) is n't too bad...Also being a software developer and being just a coder might get you a fair ways... but if you are going anywhere up I have seen huge differences when you take an engineer and make them a tech lead , and when you take a non-engineer and make them a tech lead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Additionally, knowing about algorithms helps if you need to slightly modify one to help in your specific case.
There are many cases where you might use 1 of ... well tons of sorting algorithms, but knowing how to tweak one over the other so that your case your O() isn't too bad...Also being a software developer and being just a coder might get you a fair ways... but if you are going anywhere up I have seen huge differences when you take an engineer and make them a tech lead, and when you take a non-engineer and make them a tech lead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107664</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>doubly linked lists are trivial to implement and ANY BASIC coder should know how and WHEN to use them. that is nothing to brag about. those are BASIC skills.</p><p>can you analyze the running time of your algorithm and determine if you should use a linear or recursive solution? can you solve recurrences? when to use a heapsort? slpay tree? could you improve efficiency by using an AVL tree over a red-black tree? and you analyze the running time of your various solutions and show on paper, which is the fastest?</p><p>
&nbsp; those, among many others, are the skils that real programmers possess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>doubly linked lists are trivial to implement and ANY BASIC coder should know how and WHEN to use them .
that is nothing to brag about .
those are BASIC skills.can you analyze the running time of your algorithm and determine if you should use a linear or recursive solution ?
can you solve recurrences ?
when to use a heapsort ?
slpay tree ?
could you improve efficiency by using an AVL tree over a red-black tree ?
and you analyze the running time of your various solutions and show on paper , which is the fastest ?
  those , among many others , are the skils that real programmers possess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>doubly linked lists are trivial to implement and ANY BASIC coder should know how and WHEN to use them.
that is nothing to brag about.
those are BASIC skills.can you analyze the running time of your algorithm and determine if you should use a linear or recursive solution?
can you solve recurrences?
when to use a heapsort?
slpay tree?
could you improve efficiency by using an AVL tree over a red-black tree?
and you analyze the running time of your various solutions and show on paper, which is the fastest?
  those, among many others, are the skils that real programmers possess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30202944</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258996800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like somebody is maturing Slashdot hasn't changed, you have.  I consider it an ant farm equivalent, but instead of ants I get to see nerds.  Yes it is a nerd farm.  Watch me burn this nerd and see how he responds.</p><p>This will be good....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like somebody is maturing Slashdot has n't changed , you have .
I consider it an ant farm equivalent , but instead of ants I get to see nerds .
Yes it is a nerd farm .
Watch me burn this nerd and see how he responds.This will be good... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like somebody is maturing Slashdot hasn't changed, you have.
I consider it an ant farm equivalent, but instead of ants I get to see nerds.
Yes it is a nerd farm.
Watch me burn this nerd and see how he responds.This will be good....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116230</id>
	<title>attack is a primitive response</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258391100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I almost stopped reading there. But I kept going, hoping to find some redeeming value.</p></div><p>Rejecting all future information because of a few errors (whatever level of the message stack it originated from) in initial part of data packet stream?</p><p>Not wise.</p><p>Some more corrections:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their <strong>origin</strong>, or know their correct spelling. This helps you come across as a pompous idiot. (<strong>hate words not compulsory</strong>)</p><p>For example: "Queue awkward silence."</p><p>The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence." It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects.</p> </div><p><div class="quote"><p> <strong>How does one "queue" awkward silence?</strong></p> </div><p>This is the said rhetoric that takes time out of good work</p><p>Mods seem to love strong opinions with a few American conversation smarts thrown in as spices.</p><p>I have no idea what your collar looks like, and I don't have one (T-shirt), but I must mention that <strong>attack is a primitive response to a stream of information not <em>forced</em> onto your consciousness.</strong> </p><p><div class="quote"><p>You are a <strong>douchebag</strong>, <strong>period</strong>.</p></div><p>Hmmm.... Do we see a distinct affinity for certain human organs here?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I almost stopped reading there .
But I kept going , hoping to find some redeeming value.Rejecting all future information because of a few errors ( whatever level of the message stack it originated from ) in initial part of data packet stream ? Not wise.Some more corrections : Furthermore , Mr. Spiegel , you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their origin , or know their correct spelling .
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot .
( hate words not compulsory ) For example : " Queue awkward silence .
" The correct spelling is " cue awkward silence .
" It comes from stage and movie production , where the producer will " cue " actors , lights , or special effects .
How does one " queue " awkward silence ?
This is the said rhetoric that takes time out of good workMods seem to love strong opinions with a few American conversation smarts thrown in as spices.I have no idea what your collar looks like , and I do n't have one ( T-shirt ) , but I must mention that attack is a primitive response to a stream of information not forced onto your consciousness .
You are a douchebag , period.Hmmm.... Do we see a distinct affinity for certain human organs here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I almost stopped reading there.
But I kept going, hoping to find some redeeming value.Rejecting all future information because of a few errors (whatever level of the message stack it originated from) in initial part of data packet stream?Not wise.Some more corrections:Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their origin, or know their correct spelling.
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.
(hate words not compulsory)For example: "Queue awkward silence.
"The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence.
" It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects.
How does one "queue" awkward silence?
This is the said rhetoric that takes time out of good workMods seem to love strong opinions with a few American conversation smarts thrown in as spices.I have no idea what your collar looks like, and I don't have one (T-shirt), but I must mention that attack is a primitive response to a stream of information not forced onto your consciousness.
You are a douchebag, period.Hmmm.... Do we see a distinct affinity for certain human organs here?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108042</id>
	<title>How much you get paid depends on your reputation</title>
	<author>melted</author>
	<datestamp>1258317780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much you get paid depends on your reputation. And a good school (+a good GPA) gives you a head start on that, since the assumption is that if you showed good academic performance you, at the very least, won't be as dumb as a door knob.</p><p>The degree ceases to matter about 2-3 years into your career if you do a good job. Thing is, those with a degree get further ahead and build stronger reputation. 10 years in you look at your code and scratch your forehead wondering: "It looks about as good as 10 years ago, why the heck am I paid 3-4 times as much?" And the answer is, experience and reputation. Businesses will pay dearly for a good track record.</p><p>This is not to say that reputation is the only benefit that you get from school. In anything but the most mundane of work you will need to know quite a bit from those CS classes you've taken. If you're finding yourself not needing anything at all from your educational background, then perhaps you should try to advance in your career and do things a brain damaged monkey in Elbonia can't do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much you get paid depends on your reputation .
And a good school ( + a good GPA ) gives you a head start on that , since the assumption is that if you showed good academic performance you , at the very least , wo n't be as dumb as a door knob.The degree ceases to matter about 2-3 years into your career if you do a good job .
Thing is , those with a degree get further ahead and build stronger reputation .
10 years in you look at your code and scratch your forehead wondering : " It looks about as good as 10 years ago , why the heck am I paid 3-4 times as much ?
" And the answer is , experience and reputation .
Businesses will pay dearly for a good track record.This is not to say that reputation is the only benefit that you get from school .
In anything but the most mundane of work you will need to know quite a bit from those CS classes you 've taken .
If you 're finding yourself not needing anything at all from your educational background , then perhaps you should try to advance in your career and do things a brain damaged monkey in Elbonia ca n't do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much you get paid depends on your reputation.
And a good school (+a good GPA) gives you a head start on that, since the assumption is that if you showed good academic performance you, at the very least, won't be as dumb as a door knob.The degree ceases to matter about 2-3 years into your career if you do a good job.
Thing is, those with a degree get further ahead and build stronger reputation.
10 years in you look at your code and scratch your forehead wondering: "It looks about as good as 10 years ago, why the heck am I paid 3-4 times as much?
" And the answer is, experience and reputation.
Businesses will pay dearly for a good track record.This is not to say that reputation is the only benefit that you get from school.
In anything but the most mundane of work you will need to know quite a bit from those CS classes you've taken.
If you're finding yourself not needing anything at all from your educational background, then perhaps you should try to advance in your career and do things a brain damaged monkey in Elbonia can't do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110638</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>cesutherland</author>
	<datestamp>1258292760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>inflaming emotions over an issue that can't possibly be resolved objectively</p></div><p>Shut up!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>inflaming emotions over an issue that ca n't possibly be resolved objectivelyShut up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>inflaming emotions over an issue that can't possibly be resolved objectivelyShut up!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110442</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>crispytwo</author>
	<datestamp>1258291020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point is that he thinks that degree holding programmers are not 'better' than non-degree holding programmers on average. From experience, this is not true.</p><p>IMO, one who holds a degree will be better able to solve problems than those who don't. Period. I've hired dozens of software developers from both streams, and I have worked with hundreds from both streams. Although there are shining stars in each, the better software developers, on average, are those with a degree. The ones I wished would find different and better suited work were typically not degree holding. The stars will be stars no matter what, and for them, reading a book (or probably dozens) will suit them better anyway.</p><p>When I hire a 2 year diploma holding developer, I know I will have a decent and narrow developer for the task. When I hire a 4 year degree holding developer, I know I probably have a decent and broader developer for the task. Sometimes, I get lucky and I can see a star coming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is that he thinks that degree holding programmers are not 'better ' than non-degree holding programmers on average .
From experience , this is not true.IMO , one who holds a degree will be better able to solve problems than those who do n't .
Period. I 've hired dozens of software developers from both streams , and I have worked with hundreds from both streams .
Although there are shining stars in each , the better software developers , on average , are those with a degree .
The ones I wished would find different and better suited work were typically not degree holding .
The stars will be stars no matter what , and for them , reading a book ( or probably dozens ) will suit them better anyway.When I hire a 2 year diploma holding developer , I know I will have a decent and narrow developer for the task .
When I hire a 4 year degree holding developer , I know I probably have a decent and broader developer for the task .
Sometimes , I get lucky and I can see a star coming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point is that he thinks that degree holding programmers are not 'better' than non-degree holding programmers on average.
From experience, this is not true.IMO, one who holds a degree will be better able to solve problems than those who don't.
Period. I've hired dozens of software developers from both streams, and I have worked with hundreds from both streams.
Although there are shining stars in each, the better software developers, on average, are those with a degree.
The ones I wished would find different and better suited work were typically not degree holding.
The stars will be stars no matter what, and for them, reading a book (or probably dozens) will suit them better anyway.When I hire a 2 year diploma holding developer, I know I will have a decent and narrow developer for the task.
When I hire a 4 year degree holding developer, I know I probably have a decent and broader developer for the task.
Sometimes, I get lucky and I can see a star coming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112198</id>
	<title>You insensitive clod!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258309200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You insensitive clod! I couldn't afford a four year degree!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You insensitive clod !
I could n't afford a four year degree !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You insensitive clod!
I couldn't afford a four year degree!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108166</id>
	<title>A BS/MS helps get considered</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258318560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and an MS in Computer Science.  I started in engineering and moved into programming after getting the MS in comp sci.</p><p>I stressed programming when doing my electrical engineering degree but it was really the MS in Comp Sci that helped the transition in my career.</p><p>I have done hiring for developers.  The degree helps for consideration.  It's only one way that helps though.  If I got recommendation from someone I trusted that worked with the person before (as a developer) it would mean more than the 4 year degree.  But in a vacuum the person with the BS (or MS) definitely gets a closer look.</p><p>My advice would be to go for more education, the more the better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and an MS in Computer Science .
I started in engineering and moved into programming after getting the MS in comp sci.I stressed programming when doing my electrical engineering degree but it was really the MS in Comp Sci that helped the transition in my career.I have done hiring for developers .
The degree helps for consideration .
It 's only one way that helps though .
If I got recommendation from someone I trusted that worked with the person before ( as a developer ) it would mean more than the 4 year degree .
But in a vacuum the person with the BS ( or MS ) definitely gets a closer look.My advice would be to go for more education , the more the better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and an MS in Computer Science.
I started in engineering and moved into programming after getting the MS in comp sci.I stressed programming when doing my electrical engineering degree but it was really the MS in Comp Sci that helped the transition in my career.I have done hiring for developers.
The degree helps for consideration.
It's only one way that helps though.
If I got recommendation from someone I trusted that worked with the person before (as a developer) it would mean more than the 4 year degree.
But in a vacuum the person with the BS (or MS) definitely gets a closer look.My advice would be to go for more education, the more the better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113504</id>
	<title>Broader knowledge</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1258370760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So why, asks a longtime developer, is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree, when 'blue collar' coders might be better trained?</p></div><p>Is there? And are they? I think it depends on what you need a developer for and how your development team works. If your developers are merely coders, who are given a set of specifications and told "make it so!", then you just need somebody who can write code. If you expect more of your people, and want them to go from being just coders to taking on greater responsibility, then it may be a good idea to have somebody with a broader education. Being able to write C code doesn't make you good at guessing the effect a new feature will have on your users; a degree in psychology or sociology might, perhaps.</p><p>The other, and perhaps the biggest, benefit you get from an academical education is the training in handling complex issues in a methodical way, as well as potentially a wider outlook on the world, which is something a lot of businesses could benefit from IMO.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So why , asks a longtime developer , is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree , when 'blue collar ' coders might be better trained ? Is there ?
And are they ?
I think it depends on what you need a developer for and how your development team works .
If your developers are merely coders , who are given a set of specifications and told " make it so !
" , then you just need somebody who can write code .
If you expect more of your people , and want them to go from being just coders to taking on greater responsibility , then it may be a good idea to have somebody with a broader education .
Being able to write C code does n't make you good at guessing the effect a new feature will have on your users ; a degree in psychology or sociology might , perhaps.The other , and perhaps the biggest , benefit you get from an academical education is the training in handling complex issues in a methodical way , as well as potentially a wider outlook on the world , which is something a lot of businesses could benefit from IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why, asks a longtime developer, is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree, when 'blue collar' coders might be better trained?Is there?
And are they?
I think it depends on what you need a developer for and how your development team works.
If your developers are merely coders, who are given a set of specifications and told "make it so!
", then you just need somebody who can write code.
If you expect more of your people, and want them to go from being just coders to taking on greater responsibility, then it may be a good idea to have somebody with a broader education.
Being able to write C code doesn't make you good at guessing the effect a new feature will have on your users; a degree in psychology or sociology might, perhaps.The other, and perhaps the biggest, benefit you get from an academical education is the training in handling complex issues in a methodical way, as well as potentially a wider outlook on the world, which is something a lot of businesses could benefit from IMO.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107976</id>
	<title>Great software</title>
	<author>Ibag</author>
	<datestamp>1258317480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it really fair to compare people who went to universities to people who went to vocational college to focus on writing great software?  Wouldn't it be better to compare them to people who went to vocational college to write regular software?</p><p>Of course, I don't know exactly what is taught at a vocational college, but my guess is that it revolves more around programming than computer science, and that is the difference.  If you know how to program, and you know all about the standard libraries, than you can accomplish quite a lot.  However, what you don't cover in a CS program is likely going to be picked up quickly on the job, while the theoretical underpinnings of a good CS degree will not just be picked up by someone who doesn't already have them.</p><p>Depending on the job, it might not make a difference at all.  If you don't need fancy algorithms and data structures, if you're not doing OS coding, if everything is straight forward to implement, or if you never have to do anything that isn't already well covered by standard libraries, then going to a vocational school is probably great preparation.  However, if that's not the case, then there are things you need to learn (either in or out of school).</p><p>It really does depend on the job, though.   A man who knows how to design cogs and create vast machines of his own with them isn't going to have an advantage over a man who can just put cogs together following a diagram if the job is as part of an assembly line.  So I would say, there are blue collar programming gigs, and there are white collar ones.  For a blue collar one, either education level works fine, and are perhaps equivalent.  For a white collar one, that's no longer the case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it really fair to compare people who went to universities to people who went to vocational college to focus on writing great software ?
Would n't it be better to compare them to people who went to vocational college to write regular software ? Of course , I do n't know exactly what is taught at a vocational college , but my guess is that it revolves more around programming than computer science , and that is the difference .
If you know how to program , and you know all about the standard libraries , than you can accomplish quite a lot .
However , what you do n't cover in a CS program is likely going to be picked up quickly on the job , while the theoretical underpinnings of a good CS degree will not just be picked up by someone who does n't already have them.Depending on the job , it might not make a difference at all .
If you do n't need fancy algorithms and data structures , if you 're not doing OS coding , if everything is straight forward to implement , or if you never have to do anything that is n't already well covered by standard libraries , then going to a vocational school is probably great preparation .
However , if that 's not the case , then there are things you need to learn ( either in or out of school ) .It really does depend on the job , though .
A man who knows how to design cogs and create vast machines of his own with them is n't going to have an advantage over a man who can just put cogs together following a diagram if the job is as part of an assembly line .
So I would say , there are blue collar programming gigs , and there are white collar ones .
For a blue collar one , either education level works fine , and are perhaps equivalent .
For a white collar one , that 's no longer the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it really fair to compare people who went to universities to people who went to vocational college to focus on writing great software?
Wouldn't it be better to compare them to people who went to vocational college to write regular software?Of course, I don't know exactly what is taught at a vocational college, but my guess is that it revolves more around programming than computer science, and that is the difference.
If you know how to program, and you know all about the standard libraries, than you can accomplish quite a lot.
However, what you don't cover in a CS program is likely going to be picked up quickly on the job, while the theoretical underpinnings of a good CS degree will not just be picked up by someone who doesn't already have them.Depending on the job, it might not make a difference at all.
If you don't need fancy algorithms and data structures, if you're not doing OS coding, if everything is straight forward to implement, or if you never have to do anything that isn't already well covered by standard libraries, then going to a vocational school is probably great preparation.
However, if that's not the case, then there are things you need to learn (either in or out of school).It really does depend on the job, though.
A man who knows how to design cogs and create vast machines of his own with them isn't going to have an advantage over a man who can just put cogs together following a diagram if the job is as part of an assembly line.
So I would say, there are blue collar programming gigs, and there are white collar ones.
For a blue collar one, either education level works fine, and are perhaps equivalent.
For a white collar one, that's no longer the case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108152</id>
	<title>Where you finish depends on where you start.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258318440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I started learned boolean algebra and logic circuits when I was 9.  I took a training course in computer programming when I was 10 (in 1980).  That was pretty much all the training I needed in the field.   My mind was too hungry to wait around for someone to teach me things.  I recognized this at that young age and decided that I had to teach myself how to learn new things.  I taught myself fractions and completed the workbook in one night (it was supposed to last through weeks and weeks of schooling).   School became sort of a joke for me, it was where I went to sleep, see friends, and wait around until I got to go home and program my Atari 400. They put me in the 'advanced' class in school a few times but all it really meant to me was more homework (and less time to program), so I lost interest and eventually they kicked me back to the 'regular' class.  At home I was building my own electric motors and experimenting with logic circuits, and at school I was stuck with too many teachers who barely knew the subjects they were teaching (I knew what hexadecimal was, but the programming teacher at our high school did not).  I was frustrated with school pretty much the entire time I was forced to go there.  Ok, some of the classes like English helped, wood shop was fun, and history and social studies were necessary though still nothing more than rote memorization.  Later in high school, chemistry was interesting, though I had also already dabbled in that on my own time as well. Towards the end of high school I hated the idea of sitting through 4 more years of boring lectures on topics I already was already thoroughly familiar with.  I went to a vocational school to get a quicker 2-year piece of paper to put on my wall and I got to work ASAP.  I'm doing pretty well now, though I don't really have a chance of getting a job at places like Google because I'm not a PhD (though my friends that are PhDs and work for Google "fucking hate it there" - their words, not mine).  I'm pretty happy with my job, I make over 100k/yr, and I still never stop learning and teaching myself new things.</p><p>School has always seemed more of hindrance to me than anything. If someone wants to learn something, they do not have to go to a school to do it (given that they have a reasonable amount of intelligence to begin with).  The only thing school really gives you is the piece of paper on the wall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I started learned boolean algebra and logic circuits when I was 9 .
I took a training course in computer programming when I was 10 ( in 1980 ) .
That was pretty much all the training I needed in the field .
My mind was too hungry to wait around for someone to teach me things .
I recognized this at that young age and decided that I had to teach myself how to learn new things .
I taught myself fractions and completed the workbook in one night ( it was supposed to last through weeks and weeks of schooling ) .
School became sort of a joke for me , it was where I went to sleep , see friends , and wait around until I got to go home and program my Atari 400 .
They put me in the 'advanced ' class in school a few times but all it really meant to me was more homework ( and less time to program ) , so I lost interest and eventually they kicked me back to the 'regular ' class .
At home I was building my own electric motors and experimenting with logic circuits , and at school I was stuck with too many teachers who barely knew the subjects they were teaching ( I knew what hexadecimal was , but the programming teacher at our high school did not ) .
I was frustrated with school pretty much the entire time I was forced to go there .
Ok , some of the classes like English helped , wood shop was fun , and history and social studies were necessary though still nothing more than rote memorization .
Later in high school , chemistry was interesting , though I had also already dabbled in that on my own time as well .
Towards the end of high school I hated the idea of sitting through 4 more years of boring lectures on topics I already was already thoroughly familiar with .
I went to a vocational school to get a quicker 2-year piece of paper to put on my wall and I got to work ASAP .
I 'm doing pretty well now , though I do n't really have a chance of getting a job at places like Google because I 'm not a PhD ( though my friends that are PhDs and work for Google " fucking hate it there " - their words , not mine ) .
I 'm pretty happy with my job , I make over 100k/yr , and I still never stop learning and teaching myself new things.School has always seemed more of hindrance to me than anything .
If someone wants to learn something , they do not have to go to a school to do it ( given that they have a reasonable amount of intelligence to begin with ) .
The only thing school really gives you is the piece of paper on the wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I started learned boolean algebra and logic circuits when I was 9.
I took a training course in computer programming when I was 10 (in 1980).
That was pretty much all the training I needed in the field.
My mind was too hungry to wait around for someone to teach me things.
I recognized this at that young age and decided that I had to teach myself how to learn new things.
I taught myself fractions and completed the workbook in one night (it was supposed to last through weeks and weeks of schooling).
School became sort of a joke for me, it was where I went to sleep, see friends, and wait around until I got to go home and program my Atari 400.
They put me in the 'advanced' class in school a few times but all it really meant to me was more homework (and less time to program), so I lost interest and eventually they kicked me back to the 'regular' class.
At home I was building my own electric motors and experimenting with logic circuits, and at school I was stuck with too many teachers who barely knew the subjects they were teaching (I knew what hexadecimal was, but the programming teacher at our high school did not).
I was frustrated with school pretty much the entire time I was forced to go there.
Ok, some of the classes like English helped, wood shop was fun, and history and social studies were necessary though still nothing more than rote memorization.
Later in high school, chemistry was interesting, though I had also already dabbled in that on my own time as well.
Towards the end of high school I hated the idea of sitting through 4 more years of boring lectures on topics I already was already thoroughly familiar with.
I went to a vocational school to get a quicker 2-year piece of paper to put on my wall and I got to work ASAP.
I'm doing pretty well now, though I don't really have a chance of getting a job at places like Google because I'm not a PhD (though my friends that are PhDs and work for Google "fucking hate it there" - their words, not mine).
I'm pretty happy with my job, I make over 100k/yr, and I still never stop learning and teaching myself new things.School has always seemed more of hindrance to me than anything.
If someone wants to learn something, they do not have to go to a school to do it (given that they have a reasonable amount of intelligence to begin with).
The only thing school really gives you is the piece of paper on the wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1258316280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>History and sociology don't play a part</i></p><p>Is that solely a US thing?</p><p>Here in the UK, when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only. No "you must take a language or arts subject", you just study what you came for.</p><p>I don't want to get into the relative merits and comparative breadth of education here, but I liked being immersed only in the subject I was there for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>History and sociology do n't play a partIs that solely a US thing ? Here in the UK , when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only .
No " you must take a language or arts subject " , you just study what you came for.I do n't want to get into the relative merits and comparative breadth of education here , but I liked being immersed only in the subject I was there for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>History and sociology don't play a partIs that solely a US thing?Here in the UK, when you do a degree you study aspects of that subject only.
No "you must take a language or arts subject", you just study what you came for.I don't want to get into the relative merits and comparative breadth of education here, but I liked being immersed only in the subject I was there for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108714</id>
	<title>Celebrity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258278480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't know Billy Corgan wrote code.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't know Billy Corgan wrote code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't know Billy Corgan wrote code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107780</id>
	<title>Comparing years and quality of education.</title>
	<author>viking80</author>
	<datestamp>1258316640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People without at least a 4 year degree have often big holes in their education. They may not, but it is hard to find these holes at the job interview. You can't ask "What do you not know"</p><p>So:<br>Coders with good track record without a 4y degree might perform just fine. One benefit is that with a good salary, it is easy to keep them, as it is harder for them to find a similar paying job.</p><p>Witha 4 y. degree from a top school, they will have no holes, and also a great attitude and capacity for work. It is easy for them to leave for a new job. Same degree, and not top school, they have the same skillset, but are often less competitive and goal oriented.</p><p>A masters degree usually add little, but may solve a specific skillset your team needs for the next 3 month, like some algorithm.</p><p>A Ph.D. proves you can work under some demanding professor for many years and complete menial and often complicated work with little reward. So this adds little to code quality and volume but they do however seem to be able/willing to accept more complicated/boring/laborious tasks, and come out on the other side with it done.</p><p>So for the future coder: Get a 4 year degree from a top school, and complete a masters degree if you really like something marketable. If you don't get into that top school, use the time to build a superb resume instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People without at least a 4 year degree have often big holes in their education .
They may not , but it is hard to find these holes at the job interview .
You ca n't ask " What do you not know " So : Coders with good track record without a 4y degree might perform just fine .
One benefit is that with a good salary , it is easy to keep them , as it is harder for them to find a similar paying job.Witha 4 y. degree from a top school , they will have no holes , and also a great attitude and capacity for work .
It is easy for them to leave for a new job .
Same degree , and not top school , they have the same skillset , but are often less competitive and goal oriented.A masters degree usually add little , but may solve a specific skillset your team needs for the next 3 month , like some algorithm.A Ph.D. proves you can work under some demanding professor for many years and complete menial and often complicated work with little reward .
So this adds little to code quality and volume but they do however seem to be able/willing to accept more complicated/boring/laborious tasks , and come out on the other side with it done.So for the future coder : Get a 4 year degree from a top school , and complete a masters degree if you really like something marketable .
If you do n't get into that top school , use the time to build a superb resume instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People without at least a 4 year degree have often big holes in their education.
They may not, but it is hard to find these holes at the job interview.
You can't ask "What do you not know"So:Coders with good track record without a 4y degree might perform just fine.
One benefit is that with a good salary, it is easy to keep them, as it is harder for them to find a similar paying job.Witha 4 y. degree from a top school, they will have no holes, and also a great attitude and capacity for work.
It is easy for them to leave for a new job.
Same degree, and not top school, they have the same skillset, but are often less competitive and goal oriented.A masters degree usually add little, but may solve a specific skillset your team needs for the next 3 month, like some algorithm.A Ph.D. proves you can work under some demanding professor for many years and complete menial and often complicated work with little reward.
So this adds little to code quality and volume but they do however seem to be able/willing to accept more complicated/boring/laborious tasks, and come out on the other side with it done.So for the future coder: Get a 4 year degree from a top school, and complete a masters degree if you really like something marketable.
If you don't get into that top school, use the time to build a superb resume instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108546</id>
	<title>Intelligent people self-select for smart schools</title>
	<author>jazzkat</author>
	<datestamp>1258277460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I realize that the following is a generalization, and there are always exceptions.  In this discussion, I consider "White Collar" to be a real university such as Ohio State or Carnegie-Mellon - an institution rooted in education and not profit.  "Blue Collar" is a technical institute such as DeVry, ITT Tech, or one of the for-profit online schools.
<br> <br>
I theorize that the level of thought of a particular developer largely depends on his or her experience and "adventures" before school - and the selection of school follows this pattern.
<br> <br>
Someone who ends up being an excellent developer was likely down the right path before college.  Furthermore, if someone who is traveling this path accidentally attends a Blue Collar school, they will quickly ascertain that such a school is 'below their level' and a waste of money, and leave.
<br> <br>
Why does this matter?  In a real University, the classes are challenging enough that folks who are "just in it for the money" will drop out.  The folks who love what they are doing will enjoy the challenge and persist.
<br> <br>
The "Blue Collar" schools are motivated by money (continued payment of tuition) and just getting folks through the program, so their classes are less likely to be challenging, and therefore more folks who are "just in it for the money" will pass through.  Because the classes are less challenging, the quality of the education is lower.  The wrong motivation and lower quality of education mean an employee who will make more mistakes and create less efficient software.
<br> <br>
Furthermore, someone with another degree, either as a full degree or a minor - or someone with CS as a minor - will do a better job, because such a person is more apt to look at problems from many different angles instead of just the "CS" angle.
<br> <br>
I base these assertions on my own experience.  After one trimester at DeVry, I started to get disturbed with some of the things being said by seniors.  I moved to a real school and never looked back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I realize that the following is a generalization , and there are always exceptions .
In this discussion , I consider " White Collar " to be a real university such as Ohio State or Carnegie-Mellon - an institution rooted in education and not profit .
" Blue Collar " is a technical institute such as DeVry , ITT Tech , or one of the for-profit online schools .
I theorize that the level of thought of a particular developer largely depends on his or her experience and " adventures " before school - and the selection of school follows this pattern .
Someone who ends up being an excellent developer was likely down the right path before college .
Furthermore , if someone who is traveling this path accidentally attends a Blue Collar school , they will quickly ascertain that such a school is 'below their level ' and a waste of money , and leave .
Why does this matter ?
In a real University , the classes are challenging enough that folks who are " just in it for the money " will drop out .
The folks who love what they are doing will enjoy the challenge and persist .
The " Blue Collar " schools are motivated by money ( continued payment of tuition ) and just getting folks through the program , so their classes are less likely to be challenging , and therefore more folks who are " just in it for the money " will pass through .
Because the classes are less challenging , the quality of the education is lower .
The wrong motivation and lower quality of education mean an employee who will make more mistakes and create less efficient software .
Furthermore , someone with another degree , either as a full degree or a minor - or someone with CS as a minor - will do a better job , because such a person is more apt to look at problems from many different angles instead of just the " CS " angle .
I base these assertions on my own experience .
After one trimester at DeVry , I started to get disturbed with some of the things being said by seniors .
I moved to a real school and never looked back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I realize that the following is a generalization, and there are always exceptions.
In this discussion, I consider "White Collar" to be a real university such as Ohio State or Carnegie-Mellon - an institution rooted in education and not profit.
"Blue Collar" is a technical institute such as DeVry, ITT Tech, or one of the for-profit online schools.
I theorize that the level of thought of a particular developer largely depends on his or her experience and "adventures" before school - and the selection of school follows this pattern.
Someone who ends up being an excellent developer was likely down the right path before college.
Furthermore, if someone who is traveling this path accidentally attends a Blue Collar school, they will quickly ascertain that such a school is 'below their level' and a waste of money, and leave.
Why does this matter?
In a real University, the classes are challenging enough that folks who are "just in it for the money" will drop out.
The folks who love what they are doing will enjoy the challenge and persist.
The "Blue Collar" schools are motivated by money (continued payment of tuition) and just getting folks through the program, so their classes are less likely to be challenging, and therefore more folks who are "just in it for the money" will pass through.
Because the classes are less challenging, the quality of the education is lower.
The wrong motivation and lower quality of education mean an employee who will make more mistakes and create less efficient software.
Furthermore, someone with another degree, either as a full degree or a minor - or someone with CS as a minor - will do a better job, because such a person is more apt to look at problems from many different angles instead of just the "CS" angle.
I base these assertions on my own experience.
After one trimester at DeVry, I started to get disturbed with some of the things being said by seniors.
I moved to a real school and never looked back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111696</id>
	<title>Psycology, not software</title>
	<author>$pace6host</author>
	<datestamp>1258302960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So... we have a bunch of people who didn't get degrees who are sure that degrees are worthless, a bunch of people who got degrees that are sure that degrees are essential, and a small number of people who cross over with "I wish I had gotten a degree" or "I know some people without degrees that are better than anyone else I know" stories. How enlightening - most people who felt a degree was important stuck out the work to get one, and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice, while most people who didn't think a degree was important didn't get one, and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice. Wow. This article is more about psychology than software development and education.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So... we have a bunch of people who did n't get degrees who are sure that degrees are worthless , a bunch of people who got degrees that are sure that degrees are essential , and a small number of people who cross over with " I wish I had gotten a degree " or " I know some people without degrees that are better than anyone else I know " stories .
How enlightening - most people who felt a degree was important stuck out the work to get one , and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice , while most people who did n't think a degree was important did n't get one , and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice .
Wow. This article is more about psychology than software development and education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... we have a bunch of people who didn't get degrees who are sure that degrees are worthless, a bunch of people who got degrees that are sure that degrees are essential, and a small number of people who cross over with "I wish I had gotten a degree" or "I know some people without degrees that are better than anyone else I know" stories.
How enlightening - most people who felt a degree was important stuck out the work to get one, and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice, while most people who didn't think a degree was important didn't get one, and are either happy with the result or are at least deluding themselves into believing they made the right choice.
Wow. This article is more about psychology than software development and education.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109140</id>
	<title>It's an intelligence test</title>
	<author>mdarksbane</author>
	<datestamp>1258281540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The intelligent people realize that there is a stigma attached to not having a degree, and therefore will get one so they don't have to fight their way through proving themselves separately at every job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The intelligent people realize that there is a stigma attached to not having a degree , and therefore will get one so they do n't have to fight their way through proving themselves separately at every job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The intelligent people realize that there is a stigma attached to not having a degree, and therefore will get one so they don't have to fight their way through proving themselves separately at every job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108624</id>
	<title>Saph</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258277940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went to a 4 year school... I'm a computer science engineer... the big differences is that not only we focus on writing software for all kinds of platforms, wether it be<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET, Java, Assembler... SQL... whatever... we also focus on mathematics, computer algorithms, calculus, physics and other subjects that will help us to THINK... that is what makes the difference in my opinion... anyone can take a book and star coding, but can anyone become a real software developer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to a 4 year school... I 'm a computer science engineer... the big differences is that not only we focus on writing software for all kinds of platforms , wether it be .NET , Java , Assembler... SQL... whatever... we also focus on mathematics , computer algorithms , calculus , physics and other subjects that will help us to THINK... that is what makes the difference in my opinion... anyone can take a book and star coding , but can anyone become a real software developer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to a 4 year school... I'm a computer science engineer... the big differences is that not only we focus on writing software for all kinds of platforms, wether it be .NET, Java, Assembler... SQL... whatever... we also focus on mathematics, computer algorithms, calculus, physics and other subjects that will help us to THINK... that is what makes the difference in my opinion... anyone can take a book and star coding, but can anyone become a real software developer?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114856</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>JoeMerchant</author>
	<datestamp>1258384980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but it's a cathartic release... If you haven't ranted about this lately, it feels good to let it out again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but it 's a cathartic release... If you have n't ranted about this lately , it feels good to let it out again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but it's a cathartic release... If you haven't ranted about this lately, it feels good to let it out again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109108</id>
	<title>Definition</title>
	<author>jgrahn</author>
	<datestamp>1258281300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Odd way of phrasing it -- blue-collar is about manual labor, rather than no academic training.
Programmers are by definition not white-collar.
</p><p>
But it seems from TFA that the term was applied by a bunch of self-described
"immature snobs", who most likely were drunk. Oh well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Odd way of phrasing it -- blue-collar is about manual labor , rather than no academic training .
Programmers are by definition not white-collar .
But it seems from TFA that the term was applied by a bunch of self-described " immature snobs " , who most likely were drunk .
Oh well .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Odd way of phrasing it -- blue-collar is about manual labor, rather than no academic training.
Programmers are by definition not white-collar.
But it seems from TFA that the term was applied by a bunch of self-described
"immature snobs", who most likely were drunk.
Oh well ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112810</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>inKubus</author>
	<datestamp>1258404000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to be pedantic, but if Slashdot was smoking crack it would LOSE weight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to be pedantic , but if Slashdot was smoking crack it would LOSE weight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to be pedantic, but if Slashdot was smoking crack it would LOSE weight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108098</id>
	<title>Re:From an adjacent industry...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258318020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We find the opposite. However, we look at it somewhat differently. Would you rather someone with 4 years of strong technical knowledge, and no experience with real world development, or a 2 year voc trained developer with 2 years experience in the field, learning the realities of development?</p><p>We pick the latter, and have strong, maintainable solutions, and most definitely do *not* have recent grads sitting about writing the next great framework that will solve all our problems, or using the latest, greatest tech (that we will find hard to support next year, when the true flaws of it all come out and no one wants to work with it).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We find the opposite .
However , we look at it somewhat differently .
Would you rather someone with 4 years of strong technical knowledge , and no experience with real world development , or a 2 year voc trained developer with 2 years experience in the field , learning the realities of development ? We pick the latter , and have strong , maintainable solutions , and most definitely do * not * have recent grads sitting about writing the next great framework that will solve all our problems , or using the latest , greatest tech ( that we will find hard to support next year , when the true flaws of it all come out and no one wants to work with it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We find the opposite.
However, we look at it somewhat differently.
Would you rather someone with 4 years of strong technical knowledge, and no experience with real world development, or a 2 year voc trained developer with 2 years experience in the field, learning the realities of development?We pick the latter, and have strong, maintainable solutions, and most definitely do *not* have recent grads sitting about writing the next great framework that will solve all our problems, or using the latest, greatest tech (that we will find hard to support next year, when the true flaws of it all come out and no one wants to work with it).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109062</id>
	<title>Bill Gates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258280760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does Bill Gates qualify as "Blue-Collar" or "White-Collar"?  He doesn't have a degree and yet was Chief Software Architect of Microsoft for many years.  If you were calculating the comparative compensation of Blue Collar v.s White Collar, I'm sure he would seriously slant the statistics lol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does Bill Gates qualify as " Blue-Collar " or " White-Collar " ?
He does n't have a degree and yet was Chief Software Architect of Microsoft for many years .
If you were calculating the comparative compensation of Blue Collar v.s White Collar , I 'm sure he would seriously slant the statistics lol : p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does Bill Gates qualify as "Blue-Collar" or "White-Collar"?
He doesn't have a degree and yet was Chief Software Architect of Microsoft for many years.
If you were calculating the comparative compensation of Blue Collar v.s White Collar, I'm sure he would seriously slant the statistics lol :p</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115730</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258388700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I too, found this article painful, but not just because of the colleague baiting that took place.</p><p>You see, I work in IT for a major US aerospace company. We make airliners, you know the one, and it rains here a lot. Anyway, I do have an aerospace engineering degree from a top ten US engineering university and it has actually caused me problems in the cubes.</p><p>In the average corporate IT team in our organization, many have degrees but some people don't even have a 2 year technical or other type college degree.<br>They are not that numerous, but they are there.</p><p>Not that MY nose is out of joint, but when several of these people with less valuable degrees (or no degree) found out I went to a top school, they started to sandbag me on the job, stabbing me in the back, talking shit about me with the boss, etc. The fact that someone in the group might have a solid university education can be very threatening to some people.</p><p>In a downsizing environment, it all goes back to the idea of the slowest gazelle.. If all the gazelles are running and the lion is chasing, the slower gazelles just need to throw obstacles under the feet of the faster gazelles in order to have a better chance of surviving.</p><p>It's become so prevalent that whenever I go into a new group now and people ask if I have a college degree or "where did you go to school?", I just say "college, just like everyone else" and quickly move on to a new topic.</p><p>Oh, and for all the vocational school people, I don't remember all that I was taught. But I have had a great career in aircraft engineering and in software development and I just have to say that a 4 year degree teaches you how to think, not just how to memorize. I have a terrible memory anyway..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I too , found this article painful , but not just because of the colleague baiting that took place.You see , I work in IT for a major US aerospace company .
We make airliners , you know the one , and it rains here a lot .
Anyway , I do have an aerospace engineering degree from a top ten US engineering university and it has actually caused me problems in the cubes.In the average corporate IT team in our organization , many have degrees but some people do n't even have a 2 year technical or other type college degree.They are not that numerous , but they are there.Not that MY nose is out of joint , but when several of these people with less valuable degrees ( or no degree ) found out I went to a top school , they started to sandbag me on the job , stabbing me in the back , talking shit about me with the boss , etc .
The fact that someone in the group might have a solid university education can be very threatening to some people.In a downsizing environment , it all goes back to the idea of the slowest gazelle.. If all the gazelles are running and the lion is chasing , the slower gazelles just need to throw obstacles under the feet of the faster gazelles in order to have a better chance of surviving.It 's become so prevalent that whenever I go into a new group now and people ask if I have a college degree or " where did you go to school ?
" , I just say " college , just like everyone else " and quickly move on to a new topic.Oh , and for all the vocational school people , I do n't remember all that I was taught .
But I have had a great career in aircraft engineering and in software development and I just have to say that a 4 year degree teaches you how to think , not just how to memorize .
I have a terrible memory anyway. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I too, found this article painful, but not just because of the colleague baiting that took place.You see, I work in IT for a major US aerospace company.
We make airliners, you know the one, and it rains here a lot.
Anyway, I do have an aerospace engineering degree from a top ten US engineering university and it has actually caused me problems in the cubes.In the average corporate IT team in our organization, many have degrees but some people don't even have a 2 year technical or other type college degree.They are not that numerous, but they are there.Not that MY nose is out of joint, but when several of these people with less valuable degrees (or no degree) found out I went to a top school, they started to sandbag me on the job, stabbing me in the back, talking shit about me with the boss, etc.
The fact that someone in the group might have a solid university education can be very threatening to some people.In a downsizing environment, it all goes back to the idea of the slowest gazelle.. If all the gazelles are running and the lion is chasing, the slower gazelles just need to throw obstacles under the feet of the faster gazelles in order to have a better chance of surviving.It's become so prevalent that whenever I go into a new group now and people ask if I have a college degree or "where did you go to school?
", I just say "college, just like everyone else" and quickly move on to a new topic.Oh, and for all the vocational school people, I don't remember all that I was taught.
But I have had a great career in aircraft engineering and in software development and I just have to say that a 4 year degree teaches you how to think, not just how to memorize.
I have a terrible memory anyway..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109842</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>db32</author>
	<datestamp>1258286700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ugh...another one of those "bullet point list makers".  Not all of us have to do a point by point commentary to say how stupid and meaningless a story like this is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ugh...another one of those " bullet point list makers " .
Not all of us have to do a point by point commentary to say how stupid and meaningless a story like this is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ugh...another one of those "bullet point list makers".
Not all of us have to do a point by point commentary to say how stupid and meaningless a story like this is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109380</id>
	<title>Not only stupid, but wrong and offensive</title>
	<author>mlwmohawk</author>
	<datestamp>1258283280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am in my later 40s. I have been in "high tech" since the early 1980s.<br>I do not have a degree.<br>I built my first computer in the 1970s.<br>I learned the concepts of computer science from an old navy programmer in high school. (in the late 70s)</p><p>When I entered the software industry, computer science was considered a math. In many ways, it is just an expression of a series of non-linear calculus equations, only with a different set of languages to express it.</p><p>I wish the industry were heading in a different direction, but stupid people who think a degree means "learning" have infiltrated the profession. Here's the problem: 25 years ago, you had to be smart and know your shit to work in the industry. Smart people understand that learning is a personal process and no piece of paper can substitute for innate curiosity and a drive for learning. It is the stupid people who barely get through college, barely retain anything they've learned, but managed to acquire a diploma, think, like the strawman from the wizard of oz, that they are now smart. It is these people that become the gatekeepers in the industry. It is the childish and oblivious value they put on the meaningless diploma that harms the industry. Smart people who know what they are doing are passed over for frat boys. The more of them there are in the industry, the more the industry will tend to go in that direction.</p><p>It should be sobering that most of the most meaningful developments in computer science have come from smart people who never learned anything about computers in school.</p><p>When I interview guys from supposedly good technical schools, and ask them how hash tables work or what a "call gate" is, I get a blank look and the response: "Why do I need to know that?" Anyone that has ever uttered that phrase, "why do I need to know that," is an idiot and should not work in any profession that requires knowledge.</p><p>When I was younger, computer science was the science of solving problems on actual computers. It is an interesting science as "real" computers have limitations. Understanding the limitations and operation of the computer allowed you to come up with interesting algorithms. The most used algorithms of our time have come from this type of thinking. These days, you'd be hard pressed to find a computer science grad that actually has any sort of clue about how real computers work. They don't understand why there are signed and unsigned integers and think that pointers are "bad."</p><p>So, blue collar or white collar? It doesn't matter. The idiots are running the industry. Moronic MBAs are coining buzzword phrases like "AGILE" development, and generally making the software industry a hopeless idiocracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am in my later 40s .
I have been in " high tech " since the early 1980s.I do not have a degree.I built my first computer in the 1970s.I learned the concepts of computer science from an old navy programmer in high school .
( in the late 70s ) When I entered the software industry , computer science was considered a math .
In many ways , it is just an expression of a series of non-linear calculus equations , only with a different set of languages to express it.I wish the industry were heading in a different direction , but stupid people who think a degree means " learning " have infiltrated the profession .
Here 's the problem : 25 years ago , you had to be smart and know your shit to work in the industry .
Smart people understand that learning is a personal process and no piece of paper can substitute for innate curiosity and a drive for learning .
It is the stupid people who barely get through college , barely retain anything they 've learned , but managed to acquire a diploma , think , like the strawman from the wizard of oz , that they are now smart .
It is these people that become the gatekeepers in the industry .
It is the childish and oblivious value they put on the meaningless diploma that harms the industry .
Smart people who know what they are doing are passed over for frat boys .
The more of them there are in the industry , the more the industry will tend to go in that direction.It should be sobering that most of the most meaningful developments in computer science have come from smart people who never learned anything about computers in school.When I interview guys from supposedly good technical schools , and ask them how hash tables work or what a " call gate " is , I get a blank look and the response : " Why do I need to know that ?
" Anyone that has ever uttered that phrase , " why do I need to know that , " is an idiot and should not work in any profession that requires knowledge.When I was younger , computer science was the science of solving problems on actual computers .
It is an interesting science as " real " computers have limitations .
Understanding the limitations and operation of the computer allowed you to come up with interesting algorithms .
The most used algorithms of our time have come from this type of thinking .
These days , you 'd be hard pressed to find a computer science grad that actually has any sort of clue about how real computers work .
They do n't understand why there are signed and unsigned integers and think that pointers are " bad .
" So , blue collar or white collar ?
It does n't matter .
The idiots are running the industry .
Moronic MBAs are coining buzzword phrases like " AGILE " development , and generally making the software industry a hopeless idiocracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am in my later 40s.
I have been in "high tech" since the early 1980s.I do not have a degree.I built my first computer in the 1970s.I learned the concepts of computer science from an old navy programmer in high school.
(in the late 70s)When I entered the software industry, computer science was considered a math.
In many ways, it is just an expression of a series of non-linear calculus equations, only with a different set of languages to express it.I wish the industry were heading in a different direction, but stupid people who think a degree means "learning" have infiltrated the profession.
Here's the problem: 25 years ago, you had to be smart and know your shit to work in the industry.
Smart people understand that learning is a personal process and no piece of paper can substitute for innate curiosity and a drive for learning.
It is the stupid people who barely get through college, barely retain anything they've learned, but managed to acquire a diploma, think, like the strawman from the wizard of oz, that they are now smart.
It is these people that become the gatekeepers in the industry.
It is the childish and oblivious value they put on the meaningless diploma that harms the industry.
Smart people who know what they are doing are passed over for frat boys.
The more of them there are in the industry, the more the industry will tend to go in that direction.It should be sobering that most of the most meaningful developments in computer science have come from smart people who never learned anything about computers in school.When I interview guys from supposedly good technical schools, and ask them how hash tables work or what a "call gate" is, I get a blank look and the response: "Why do I need to know that?
" Anyone that has ever uttered that phrase, "why do I need to know that," is an idiot and should not work in any profession that requires knowledge.When I was younger, computer science was the science of solving problems on actual computers.
It is an interesting science as "real" computers have limitations.
Understanding the limitations and operation of the computer allowed you to come up with interesting algorithms.
The most used algorithms of our time have come from this type of thinking.
These days, you'd be hard pressed to find a computer science grad that actually has any sort of clue about how real computers work.
They don't understand why there are signed and unsigned integers and think that pointers are "bad.
"So, blue collar or white collar?
It doesn't matter.
The idiots are running the industry.
Moronic MBAs are coining buzzword phrases like "AGILE" development, and generally making the software industry a hopeless idiocracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107632</id>
	<title>I don't know...</title>
	<author>Godji</author>
	<datestamp>1258315740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Are You a Blue-Collar Or White-Collar Developer?</i> <br>
<br>
It depends on what I feel like wearing that day, I guess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are You a Blue-Collar Or White-Collar Developer ?
It depends on what I feel like wearing that day , I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are You a Blue-Collar Or White-Collar Developer?
It depends on what I feel like wearing that day, I guess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110758</id>
	<title>Experience is where its at</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1258294020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience the workplace is where you learn the most practical things. When I went to school we had an internal debate in one of our classes on whether people or technical skills are more important on the job as a manager.</p><p>People skills won hands down because technical skills can be learned on the job. People skills, attitude, and experience is what is required to get the job done.</p><p>I just got my bachelors degree in Business last summer and so far it has not helped me in I.T. It did land me a job as a substitute teacher which pays more than minimium wage which is great in this economy but it is not a guaranteed ticket to a middle class lifestyle and career like some here say it is. I have a feeling if I changed my major to computer science it would not help as that degree is not as versatile in the private sector and in a down economy India looks more attractive.</p><p>Just because someone knows calculus and can write a few lines of code in Java does not mean that individual knows practical processes and working in very large coding projects with customers and real timelines.</p><p>If I had more experience and did not cut back on work to finish my education I probably would be in my field now. Its damned if you do and damned if you don't. Employers like both experience and a degree because it reduces liability when a bad employee is let go. Companies like FedEX require a computer science degree and experience as a cover your ass policy in case of wrongful termination lawsuits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience the workplace is where you learn the most practical things .
When I went to school we had an internal debate in one of our classes on whether people or technical skills are more important on the job as a manager.People skills won hands down because technical skills can be learned on the job .
People skills , attitude , and experience is what is required to get the job done.I just got my bachelors degree in Business last summer and so far it has not helped me in I.T .
It did land me a job as a substitute teacher which pays more than minimium wage which is great in this economy but it is not a guaranteed ticket to a middle class lifestyle and career like some here say it is .
I have a feeling if I changed my major to computer science it would not help as that degree is not as versatile in the private sector and in a down economy India looks more attractive.Just because someone knows calculus and can write a few lines of code in Java does not mean that individual knows practical processes and working in very large coding projects with customers and real timelines.If I had more experience and did not cut back on work to finish my education I probably would be in my field now .
Its damned if you do and damned if you do n't .
Employers like both experience and a degree because it reduces liability when a bad employee is let go .
Companies like FedEX require a computer science degree and experience as a cover your ass policy in case of wrongful termination lawsuits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience the workplace is where you learn the most practical things.
When I went to school we had an internal debate in one of our classes on whether people or technical skills are more important on the job as a manager.People skills won hands down because technical skills can be learned on the job.
People skills, attitude, and experience is what is required to get the job done.I just got my bachelors degree in Business last summer and so far it has not helped me in I.T.
It did land me a job as a substitute teacher which pays more than minimium wage which is great in this economy but it is not a guaranteed ticket to a middle class lifestyle and career like some here say it is.
I have a feeling if I changed my major to computer science it would not help as that degree is not as versatile in the private sector and in a down economy India looks more attractive.Just because someone knows calculus and can write a few lines of code in Java does not mean that individual knows practical processes and working in very large coding projects with customers and real timelines.If I had more experience and did not cut back on work to finish my education I probably would be in my field now.
Its damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Employers like both experience and a degree because it reduces liability when a bad employee is let go.
Companies like FedEX require a computer science degree and experience as a cover your ass policy in case of wrongful termination lawsuits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107994</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's a bunch of bull$h1t. I started off in highschool not having a single idea of what i wanted to do, i liked computers and saw an add for a tech school, became an MCSE in a year. And it wasn't one of those freebie mcse schools where its guaranteed. all but 3 people dropped out of the class by the end. In the end, that was just a piece of paper to get my feet in the door of a company. It showed me a few tricks but not much i didn't already know. That was back in 2000 when i was 18.</p><p>Now about 3 years ago, around 2006 I started working for a smaller company, I fixed everything in like a week. Suddenly I realized that A) Suddenly I wouldn't be needed for a full time job, and B)I really wanted to write a program, not just fix problems with them.<br>I got myself a copy of visual basic 6, then<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net, and it just immediately made sense. I didn't go to school at all, at first my programs were pretty simple and now extremely complex, maintainable, work remotely across the web securely, and i have the freedom and trust of my boss to design whatever i feel will be beneficial. I used my IT skills to ask the right questions, and then i feel as if i'm just writing them down when i code. Most of the time having an entire program in my head just by asking a few things, before i even write a single piece of code. I learned completely on the fly, ocassionally looking up syntax on google.</p><p>As for algorithms, I come up with my own. What kind of learning is memorization? that's for monkeys. I make something that works, then I take work away from it by simplifying code. until finally it only does the work necessary, in the smallest size possible. It's simple. I didn't need college for that, no one does. In fact, in both the IT and programming industries, people who went to college are generally the ones always asking me questions, that i answer without hesitation because I don't judge them. We are a team, and the better educated my team the better. Even if that means I have to fill in a few gaps for them. What I find is that they know a lot in some areas, but lack fundamentals. By that I mean the ability to be able to figure out something they've never seen before by themselves, and fully comprehend what it does and how to best take advantage of it and apply it. The only ones i'm not fond of are the ones that want you to do something for them instead of learning when i am willing to explain something.</p><p>As for politics, here's how I deal:<br>I once was in a large meeting across many it groups accross the country for a bank, I was an admin. I was specifically told to do something in a very specific way by my boss during this meeting. I followed his steps. The following week he took heat for those actions, In the meeting he told me that wasnt correct etc.. etc.. etc.., well guess what? I let him finish, then I called him out (yes in the meeting). I said "Here are the exact instructions you gave me last week during the meeting ~reading instructions out loud~, If you want me to do something correctly, give me correct orders. I followed them to the letter. 2 days later me and my friend were fired. 1 week later my ex boss was fired. This is a pattern for me and my superiors in large companies because of the bullshit I won't stand for. The one that for fired before that was an IT Director. So the lesson is don't take Sh1t from them, they are a nobody if they aren't honest. Politics don't exist if you can prove facts. Write down everything, it will save you many times.</p><p>And to answer your question about the money, yes I probably make more than you. For 2 reasons, I worked for what my boss first offered, I proved myself by writing a few programs that cut their work by 50\% or more, I then asked for a raise and showed statistical graphs from monster to prove i had been working for less in order to show real value. I asked for over $20,000 in a raise. In the end my boss felt ashamed he was paying me less before and even took me out to eat that same day. I'd never work for a large company since. Here I have value and people know what i'm worth.</p><p>-Kanaida</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's a bunch of bull $ h1t .
I started off in highschool not having a single idea of what i wanted to do , i liked computers and saw an add for a tech school , became an MCSE in a year .
And it was n't one of those freebie mcse schools where its guaranteed .
all but 3 people dropped out of the class by the end .
In the end , that was just a piece of paper to get my feet in the door of a company .
It showed me a few tricks but not much i did n't already know .
That was back in 2000 when i was 18.Now about 3 years ago , around 2006 I started working for a smaller company , I fixed everything in like a week .
Suddenly I realized that A ) Suddenly I would n't be needed for a full time job , and B ) I really wanted to write a program , not just fix problems with them.I got myself a copy of visual basic 6 , then .net , and it just immediately made sense .
I did n't go to school at all , at first my programs were pretty simple and now extremely complex , maintainable , work remotely across the web securely , and i have the freedom and trust of my boss to design whatever i feel will be beneficial .
I used my IT skills to ask the right questions , and then i feel as if i 'm just writing them down when i code .
Most of the time having an entire program in my head just by asking a few things , before i even write a single piece of code .
I learned completely on the fly , ocassionally looking up syntax on google.As for algorithms , I come up with my own .
What kind of learning is memorization ?
that 's for monkeys .
I make something that works , then I take work away from it by simplifying code .
until finally it only does the work necessary , in the smallest size possible .
It 's simple .
I did n't need college for that , no one does .
In fact , in both the IT and programming industries , people who went to college are generally the ones always asking me questions , that i answer without hesitation because I do n't judge them .
We are a team , and the better educated my team the better .
Even if that means I have to fill in a few gaps for them .
What I find is that they know a lot in some areas , but lack fundamentals .
By that I mean the ability to be able to figure out something they 've never seen before by themselves , and fully comprehend what it does and how to best take advantage of it and apply it .
The only ones i 'm not fond of are the ones that want you to do something for them instead of learning when i am willing to explain something.As for politics , here 's how I deal : I once was in a large meeting across many it groups accross the country for a bank , I was an admin .
I was specifically told to do something in a very specific way by my boss during this meeting .
I followed his steps .
The following week he took heat for those actions , In the meeting he told me that wasnt correct etc.. etc.. etc.. , well guess what ?
I let him finish , then I called him out ( yes in the meeting ) .
I said " Here are the exact instructions you gave me last week during the meeting ~ reading instructions out loud ~ , If you want me to do something correctly , give me correct orders .
I followed them to the letter .
2 days later me and my friend were fired .
1 week later my ex boss was fired .
This is a pattern for me and my superiors in large companies because of the bullshit I wo n't stand for .
The one that for fired before that was an IT Director .
So the lesson is do n't take Sh1t from them , they are a nobody if they are n't honest .
Politics do n't exist if you can prove facts .
Write down everything , it will save you many times.And to answer your question about the money , yes I probably make more than you .
For 2 reasons , I worked for what my boss first offered , I proved myself by writing a few programs that cut their work by 50 \ % or more , I then asked for a raise and showed statistical graphs from monster to prove i had been working for less in order to show real value .
I asked for over $ 20,000 in a raise .
In the end my boss felt ashamed he was paying me less before and even took me out to eat that same day .
I 'd never work for a large company since .
Here I have value and people know what i 'm worth.-Kanaida</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's a bunch of bull$h1t.
I started off in highschool not having a single idea of what i wanted to do, i liked computers and saw an add for a tech school, became an MCSE in a year.
And it wasn't one of those freebie mcse schools where its guaranteed.
all but 3 people dropped out of the class by the end.
In the end, that was just a piece of paper to get my feet in the door of a company.
It showed me a few tricks but not much i didn't already know.
That was back in 2000 when i was 18.Now about 3 years ago, around 2006 I started working for a smaller company, I fixed everything in like a week.
Suddenly I realized that A) Suddenly I wouldn't be needed for a full time job, and B)I really wanted to write a program, not just fix problems with them.I got myself a copy of visual basic 6, then .net, and it just immediately made sense.
I didn't go to school at all, at first my programs were pretty simple and now extremely complex, maintainable, work remotely across the web securely, and i have the freedom and trust of my boss to design whatever i feel will be beneficial.
I used my IT skills to ask the right questions, and then i feel as if i'm just writing them down when i code.
Most of the time having an entire program in my head just by asking a few things, before i even write a single piece of code.
I learned completely on the fly, ocassionally looking up syntax on google.As for algorithms, I come up with my own.
What kind of learning is memorization?
that's for monkeys.
I make something that works, then I take work away from it by simplifying code.
until finally it only does the work necessary, in the smallest size possible.
It's simple.
I didn't need college for that, no one does.
In fact, in both the IT and programming industries, people who went to college are generally the ones always asking me questions, that i answer without hesitation because I don't judge them.
We are a team, and the better educated my team the better.
Even if that means I have to fill in a few gaps for them.
What I find is that they know a lot in some areas, but lack fundamentals.
By that I mean the ability to be able to figure out something they've never seen before by themselves, and fully comprehend what it does and how to best take advantage of it and apply it.
The only ones i'm not fond of are the ones that want you to do something for them instead of learning when i am willing to explain something.As for politics, here's how I deal:I once was in a large meeting across many it groups accross the country for a bank, I was an admin.
I was specifically told to do something in a very specific way by my boss during this meeting.
I followed his steps.
The following week he took heat for those actions, In the meeting he told me that wasnt correct etc.. etc.. etc.., well guess what?
I let him finish, then I called him out (yes in the meeting).
I said "Here are the exact instructions you gave me last week during the meeting ~reading instructions out loud~, If you want me to do something correctly, give me correct orders.
I followed them to the letter.
2 days later me and my friend were fired.
1 week later my ex boss was fired.
This is a pattern for me and my superiors in large companies because of the bullshit I won't stand for.
The one that for fired before that was an IT Director.
So the lesson is don't take Sh1t from them, they are a nobody if they aren't honest.
Politics don't exist if you can prove facts.
Write down everything, it will save you many times.And to answer your question about the money, yes I probably make more than you.
For 2 reasons, I worked for what my boss first offered, I proved myself by writing a few programs that cut their work by 50\% or more, I then asked for a raise and showed statistical graphs from monster to prove i had been working for less in order to show real value.
I asked for over $20,000 in a raise.
In the end my boss felt ashamed he was paying me less before and even took me out to eat that same day.
I'd never work for a large company since.
Here I have value and people know what i'm worth.-Kanaida</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460</id>
	<title>gotta filter the applicants somehow</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1258314540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>When you get dozens of applications for a single position there's got to be some pre-interview filtering - otherwise people would waste all their time (no matter which side of the desk you sit on) interviewing. After you've discarded the poorly spelt and punctuated offerings and before throwing the pile into the air[1] you might as well try one more layer of objective selection. What could be better than preferring people who've got more education?
<p>
[1] once observed: the best way to select a candidate is to throw all the CVs (american: resumes) into the air. The one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired. After all we want "lucky" people working here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you get dozens of applications for a single position there 's got to be some pre-interview filtering - otherwise people would waste all their time ( no matter which side of the desk you sit on ) interviewing .
After you 've discarded the poorly spelt and punctuated offerings and before throwing the pile into the air [ 1 ] you might as well try one more layer of objective selection .
What could be better than preferring people who 've got more education ?
[ 1 ] once observed : the best way to select a candidate is to throw all the CVs ( american : resumes ) into the air .
The one ( s ) that stick to the ceiling get hired .
After all we want " lucky " people working here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you get dozens of applications for a single position there's got to be some pre-interview filtering - otherwise people would waste all their time (no matter which side of the desk you sit on) interviewing.
After you've discarded the poorly spelt and punctuated offerings and before throwing the pile into the air[1] you might as well try one more layer of objective selection.
What could be better than preferring people who've got more education?
[1] once observed: the best way to select a candidate is to throw all the CVs (american: resumes) into the air.
The one(s) that stick to the ceiling get hired.
After all we want "lucky" people working here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>SupplyMission</author>
	<datestamp>1258314180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with acidfast.
</p><p>Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning, or know their correct spelling. This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.
</p><p>For example: "Queue awkward silence."
</p><p>The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence." It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects. How does one "queue" awkward silence?
</p><p>I almost stopped reading there. But I kept going, hoping to find some redeeming value.
</p><p>It was hard to finish your article, as your tone makes it clear that you are a cocky, holier-than-thou ladder climber. You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match, and then you claim to have said things like, "Everyone is making valid points," in actual conversation. Who does that?
</p><p>God help any of us who may have to work with you, or even worse, for you. I don't care if you have Asperger's or not. You are a douchebag, period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with acidfast .
Furthermore , Mr. Spiegel , you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning , or know their correct spelling .
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot .
For example : " Queue awkward silence .
" The correct spelling is " cue awkward silence .
" It comes from stage and movie production , where the producer will " cue " actors , lights , or special effects .
How does one " queue " awkward silence ?
I almost stopped reading there .
But I kept going , hoping to find some redeeming value .
It was hard to finish your article , as your tone makes it clear that you are a cocky , holier-than-thou ladder climber .
You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match , and then you claim to have said things like , " Everyone is making valid points , " in actual conversation .
Who does that ?
God help any of us who may have to work with you , or even worse , for you .
I do n't care if you have Asperger 's or not .
You are a douchebag , period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with acidfast.
Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning, or know their correct spelling.
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.
For example: "Queue awkward silence.
"
The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence.
" It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects.
How does one "queue" awkward silence?
I almost stopped reading there.
But I kept going, hoping to find some redeeming value.
It was hard to finish your article, as your tone makes it clear that you are a cocky, holier-than-thou ladder climber.
You provoke a regular guy eating his lunch into a pissing match, and then you claim to have said things like, "Everyone is making valid points," in actual conversation.
Who does that?
God help any of us who may have to work with you, or even worse, for you.
I don't care if you have Asperger's or not.
You are a douchebag, period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110320</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>don.g</author>
	<datestamp>1258290120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Butbutbut everyone knows it's the Python programmers who are the real anti-intellectuals!</p><p>(ducks)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Butbutbut everyone knows it 's the Python programmers who are the real anti-intellectuals !
( ducks )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Butbutbut everyone knows it's the Python programmers who are the real anti-intellectuals!
(ducks)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108352</id>
	<title>Not a perfect system.</title>
	<author>fooslacker</author>
	<datestamp>1258276320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think blue collar and white collar is a poor analogy in some ways but I'll use these labels as the article has.
<br> <br>
It's not a perfect system.  There are some wonderful blue collar developers out there and there are some crappy white collar developers.  This is like any other situation where you're trying to sift through garbage to find gold, and yes most developers of either type are garbage as it's a young chaotic discipline that is poorly practiced.  The task is monumental and you need to take any statistical boost you can to lower your odds of failure.  So managers use things like 4 year degrees and certification, and world of mouth and interview and 100 other things into account trying to limit the field.  Does that mean they throw away some great candidates or underpay/value others yes but it's the only strategy they believe is available to them given the amount of garbage out there? Sure.  I would in fact argue that our selection techniques are so inadequate that most places ensure they're going to have below average IT because it is about limiting risk of failure in most places.  Additionally since most developers are crap you're getting below average developers from a pool who's average sucks (even the really smart ones have so many issues such as being arrogant about their ideas, being socially inept with the customer, not wanting to consider time and money as part of technical decisions, believing if they didn't invent it it's useless, etc)
<br> <br>
That said, I do think that the GOOD 4 year degree does serve one important function in CS.  It teaches how to think at a conceptual level about problems rather than just coding/programming where as training generally just teaches you the mechanics.  Hence hiring good developers with a classical style education has it's benefits in that it increases your odds of finding a conceptually talented person who may one day serve as an architect or senior developer.  None of this says a person who doesn't have a classical education can't do this just that fewer do.
<br> <br>
Our field is not the first to have many of these questions asked and it won't be the last.  It's the classical difference between education and training.  Education is supposed to teach you how to think while training is supposed to teach you what to do (or think).  Our education is broken and has become mostly training instead of education unfortunately which leads to the value of an education being lessened and sometimes nonexistent and hence conversations like this arise.  That doesn't mean that there isn't some seeds of education still buried in there and that does give the 4 year graduate a statistical advantage across a large sample of them.
<br> <br>
So I guess it comes down to the following.  Would I use it as a measuring stick on which person to hire into what job? Probably because I can.  In the absence of an exceptional candidate (and by definition exception doesn't mean every slashdot member who thinks they are the heir to Donald Knuth) for a job I think requires conceptual level thinking and problem solving I'll take the statistical boost.
<br> <br>
On the other hand I don't think I would use it in any way to manage performance of those I had hired.  At that point I believe I have far more relevant data related to actual job performance and an unlettered developer who shows he is much better at the conceptual pieces has a much better chance of filling my next open architect role than a lettered developer who is unproductive, bad at conceptual thinking, or just all together useless as a practical matter and the current state of our educational system will ensure I get my fill of those guys too.  I'll also get my fill of "I learned it myself and I'm better than those who didn't" cowboys too and they're usually just as bad as the others.  In the end you do your best in job hiring but the real place you have leverage is in performance management, training, and culling of folks after the hire and managers who don't understand this are setting themselves up for failure..</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think blue collar and white collar is a poor analogy in some ways but I 'll use these labels as the article has .
It 's not a perfect system .
There are some wonderful blue collar developers out there and there are some crappy white collar developers .
This is like any other situation where you 're trying to sift through garbage to find gold , and yes most developers of either type are garbage as it 's a young chaotic discipline that is poorly practiced .
The task is monumental and you need to take any statistical boost you can to lower your odds of failure .
So managers use things like 4 year degrees and certification , and world of mouth and interview and 100 other things into account trying to limit the field .
Does that mean they throw away some great candidates or underpay/value others yes but it 's the only strategy they believe is available to them given the amount of garbage out there ?
Sure. I would in fact argue that our selection techniques are so inadequate that most places ensure they 're going to have below average IT because it is about limiting risk of failure in most places .
Additionally since most developers are crap you 're getting below average developers from a pool who 's average sucks ( even the really smart ones have so many issues such as being arrogant about their ideas , being socially inept with the customer , not wanting to consider time and money as part of technical decisions , believing if they did n't invent it it 's useless , etc ) That said , I do think that the GOOD 4 year degree does serve one important function in CS .
It teaches how to think at a conceptual level about problems rather than just coding/programming where as training generally just teaches you the mechanics .
Hence hiring good developers with a classical style education has it 's benefits in that it increases your odds of finding a conceptually talented person who may one day serve as an architect or senior developer .
None of this says a person who does n't have a classical education ca n't do this just that fewer do .
Our field is not the first to have many of these questions asked and it wo n't be the last .
It 's the classical difference between education and training .
Education is supposed to teach you how to think while training is supposed to teach you what to do ( or think ) .
Our education is broken and has become mostly training instead of education unfortunately which leads to the value of an education being lessened and sometimes nonexistent and hence conversations like this arise .
That does n't mean that there is n't some seeds of education still buried in there and that does give the 4 year graduate a statistical advantage across a large sample of them .
So I guess it comes down to the following .
Would I use it as a measuring stick on which person to hire into what job ?
Probably because I can .
In the absence of an exceptional candidate ( and by definition exception does n't mean every slashdot member who thinks they are the heir to Donald Knuth ) for a job I think requires conceptual level thinking and problem solving I 'll take the statistical boost .
On the other hand I do n't think I would use it in any way to manage performance of those I had hired .
At that point I believe I have far more relevant data related to actual job performance and an unlettered developer who shows he is much better at the conceptual pieces has a much better chance of filling my next open architect role than a lettered developer who is unproductive , bad at conceptual thinking , or just all together useless as a practical matter and the current state of our educational system will ensure I get my fill of those guys too .
I 'll also get my fill of " I learned it myself and I 'm better than those who did n't " cowboys too and they 're usually just as bad as the others .
In the end you do your best in job hiring but the real place you have leverage is in performance management , training , and culling of folks after the hire and managers who do n't understand this are setting themselves up for failure. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think blue collar and white collar is a poor analogy in some ways but I'll use these labels as the article has.
It's not a perfect system.
There are some wonderful blue collar developers out there and there are some crappy white collar developers.
This is like any other situation where you're trying to sift through garbage to find gold, and yes most developers of either type are garbage as it's a young chaotic discipline that is poorly practiced.
The task is monumental and you need to take any statistical boost you can to lower your odds of failure.
So managers use things like 4 year degrees and certification, and world of mouth and interview and 100 other things into account trying to limit the field.
Does that mean they throw away some great candidates or underpay/value others yes but it's the only strategy they believe is available to them given the amount of garbage out there?
Sure.  I would in fact argue that our selection techniques are so inadequate that most places ensure they're going to have below average IT because it is about limiting risk of failure in most places.
Additionally since most developers are crap you're getting below average developers from a pool who's average sucks (even the really smart ones have so many issues such as being arrogant about their ideas, being socially inept with the customer, not wanting to consider time and money as part of technical decisions, believing if they didn't invent it it's useless, etc)
 
That said, I do think that the GOOD 4 year degree does serve one important function in CS.
It teaches how to think at a conceptual level about problems rather than just coding/programming where as training generally just teaches you the mechanics.
Hence hiring good developers with a classical style education has it's benefits in that it increases your odds of finding a conceptually talented person who may one day serve as an architect or senior developer.
None of this says a person who doesn't have a classical education can't do this just that fewer do.
Our field is not the first to have many of these questions asked and it won't be the last.
It's the classical difference between education and training.
Education is supposed to teach you how to think while training is supposed to teach you what to do (or think).
Our education is broken and has become mostly training instead of education unfortunately which leads to the value of an education being lessened and sometimes nonexistent and hence conversations like this arise.
That doesn't mean that there isn't some seeds of education still buried in there and that does give the 4 year graduate a statistical advantage across a large sample of them.
So I guess it comes down to the following.
Would I use it as a measuring stick on which person to hire into what job?
Probably because I can.
In the absence of an exceptional candidate (and by definition exception doesn't mean every slashdot member who thinks they are the heir to Donald Knuth) for a job I think requires conceptual level thinking and problem solving I'll take the statistical boost.
On the other hand I don't think I would use it in any way to manage performance of those I had hired.
At that point I believe I have far more relevant data related to actual job performance and an unlettered developer who shows he is much better at the conceptual pieces has a much better chance of filling my next open architect role than a lettered developer who is unproductive, bad at conceptual thinking, or just all together useless as a practical matter and the current state of our educational system will ensure I get my fill of those guys too.
I'll also get my fill of "I learned it myself and I'm better than those who didn't" cowboys too and they're usually just as bad as the others.
In the end you do your best in job hiring but the real place you have leverage is in performance management, training, and culling of folks after the hire and managers who don't understand this are setting themselves up for failure..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113992</id>
	<title>Re:gotta filter the applicants somehow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258377060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An old project manager of mine told me a story of an old boss he once worked under.<br>He recieved a large ammount of applications for a position, and they were all printed out and placed on his desk the day after the listing had expired.<br>He looked at the large stack of papers on his desk, grinned at my project manager and said:</p><p>"You know, we really dont need people with bad luck."</p><p>He then tossed the top half of the paper stack in the bin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An old project manager of mine told me a story of an old boss he once worked under.He recieved a large ammount of applications for a position , and they were all printed out and placed on his desk the day after the listing had expired.He looked at the large stack of papers on his desk , grinned at my project manager and said : " You know , we really dont need people with bad luck .
" He then tossed the top half of the paper stack in the bin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An old project manager of mine told me a story of an old boss he once worked under.He recieved a large ammount of applications for a position, and they were all printed out and placed on his desk the day after the listing had expired.He looked at the large stack of papers on his desk, grinned at my project manager and said:"You know, we really dont need people with bad luck.
"He then tossed the top half of the paper stack in the bin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109764</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258286100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms. I don't have a degree, but I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.</i></p><p>Well you've unintentionally hit the nail on the head.</p><p>1) Good programmers without a degree know where to look for the algorithms<br>2) Good programmers with a Bachelors understand the algorithms and why they work.<br>3) Good Computer Scientists with Graduate degrees know how to synthesize new algorithms.</p><p>And that sir is why I don't hire code monkeys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The really good " untrained " programmers know where to look for the algorithms .
I do n't have a degree , but I can use doubly linked lists , sort algorithms , mandelbrot , etc. , because when I needed them I learned how to use them.Well you 've unintentionally hit the nail on the head.1 ) Good programmers without a degree know where to look for the algorithms2 ) Good programmers with a Bachelors understand the algorithms and why they work.3 ) Good Computer Scientists with Graduate degrees know how to synthesize new algorithms.And that sir is why I do n't hire code monkeys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms.
I don't have a degree, but I can use doubly linked lists, sort algorithms, mandelbrot, etc., because when I needed them I learned how to use them.Well you've unintentionally hit the nail on the head.1) Good programmers without a degree know where to look for the algorithms2) Good programmers with a Bachelors understand the algorithms and why they work.3) Good Computer Scientists with Graduate degrees know how to synthesize new algorithms.And that sir is why I don't hire code monkeys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108376</id>
	<title>Slashdot U</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1258276440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I learned all my programming techniques, and the art of debate, from Slashdot posts.</p><p>Fear me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I learned all my programming techniques , and the art of debate , from Slashdot posts.Fear me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I learned all my programming techniques, and the art of debate, from Slashdot posts.Fear me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111700</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258303020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>How does one "queue" awkward silence?</p></div> </blockquote><blockquote><div><p> <tt>#!/bin/perl<br>push @queue, "awkward silence";</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>Yeesh.  And I thought this was an article about programmers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does one " queue " awkward silence ?
# ! /bin/perlpush @ queue , " awkward silence " ; Yeesh .
And I thought this was an article about programmers : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does one "queue" awkward silence?
#!/bin/perlpush @queue, "awkward silence"; Yeesh.
And I thought this was an article about programmers :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402</id>
	<title>White collar coders make better sheep</title>
	<author>grapeape</author>
	<datestamp>1258314240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more "disciplined" which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders.  I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student, but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime, workload, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more " disciplined " which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders .
I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student , but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime , workload , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more "disciplined" which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders.
I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student, but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime, workload, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107358</id>
	<title>Because training is only part of it</title>
	<author>MaliciousSmurf</author>
	<datestamp>1258314060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Law school loves people who have degrees like theater, psych, etc. Why? Because they can teach you all the law crap, it's your background that makes you interesting.</p><p>My brother (straight out of a liberal arts college) got a job at a competitive company that used a language he'd never touched before. Why? Because they were willing to take the time to train him. It seems to be less about being trained in the field than it is about having the essential skills to work in the kind of environment that a 4 year degree institute provides (presumably more pressure, more varied, and, yes, the culture/social status aspects are definitely a factor.) Teaching programming languages is useful, yeah, but programming languages go away. They want someone who is versatile. The presumption is that someone who didn't go to college doesn't have the basic degree of mental training that a college grad does.</p><p>My comments are talking about people straight out of whatever program, not after they've been in the field a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Law school loves people who have degrees like theater , psych , etc .
Why ? Because they can teach you all the law crap , it 's your background that makes you interesting.My brother ( straight out of a liberal arts college ) got a job at a competitive company that used a language he 'd never touched before .
Why ? Because they were willing to take the time to train him .
It seems to be less about being trained in the field than it is about having the essential skills to work in the kind of environment that a 4 year degree institute provides ( presumably more pressure , more varied , and , yes , the culture/social status aspects are definitely a factor .
) Teaching programming languages is useful , yeah , but programming languages go away .
They want someone who is versatile .
The presumption is that someone who did n't go to college does n't have the basic degree of mental training that a college grad does.My comments are talking about people straight out of whatever program , not after they 've been in the field a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Law school loves people who have degrees like theater, psych, etc.
Why? Because they can teach you all the law crap, it's your background that makes you interesting.My brother (straight out of a liberal arts college) got a job at a competitive company that used a language he'd never touched before.
Why? Because they were willing to take the time to train him.
It seems to be less about being trained in the field than it is about having the essential skills to work in the kind of environment that a 4 year degree institute provides (presumably more pressure, more varied, and, yes, the culture/social status aspects are definitely a factor.
) Teaching programming languages is useful, yeah, but programming languages go away.
They want someone who is versatile.
The presumption is that someone who didn't go to college doesn't have the basic degree of mental training that a college grad does.My comments are talking about people straight out of whatever program, not after they've been in the field a while.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110938</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1258295820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'm glad your comment loaded first.  *looks below briefly*  *clicks the tab X*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'm glad your comment loaded first .
* looks below briefly * * clicks the tab X *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'm glad your comment loaded first.
*looks below briefly*  *clicks the tab X*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107958</id>
	<title>I suppose.</title>
	<author>tthomas48</author>
	<datestamp>1258317480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would qualify as a blue collar programmer. I have a 4 year degree in theater and dance. Of course, I know how to produce a theatrical production from end to end and worked on every aspect and actually that's been very useful in programming. The ability to break down a project into pieces and get them all done is very important if you're going to be working in startup environments. If you're going to go work for a fortune 50 you might be able to just mindlessly work on a single dialog box for years, never really knowing how it fits into the larger project.</p><p>But I get hired as a white collar programmer and we often debate whether a degree is the sign of someone good or someone you want to avoid. There are just as many sloppy CS majors who don't really care about programming and don't "get it".  At the end of the day I tend towards people who have projects they work on outside of work, as that shows me they're passionate enough about programming to enjoy it in their free time.</p><p>I can fix a lack of education. I can't fix a lack of enthusiasm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would qualify as a blue collar programmer .
I have a 4 year degree in theater and dance .
Of course , I know how to produce a theatrical production from end to end and worked on every aspect and actually that 's been very useful in programming .
The ability to break down a project into pieces and get them all done is very important if you 're going to be working in startup environments .
If you 're going to go work for a fortune 50 you might be able to just mindlessly work on a single dialog box for years , never really knowing how it fits into the larger project.But I get hired as a white collar programmer and we often debate whether a degree is the sign of someone good or someone you want to avoid .
There are just as many sloppy CS majors who do n't really care about programming and do n't " get it " .
At the end of the day I tend towards people who have projects they work on outside of work , as that shows me they 're passionate enough about programming to enjoy it in their free time.I can fix a lack of education .
I ca n't fix a lack of enthusiasm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would qualify as a blue collar programmer.
I have a 4 year degree in theater and dance.
Of course, I know how to produce a theatrical production from end to end and worked on every aspect and actually that's been very useful in programming.
The ability to break down a project into pieces and get them all done is very important if you're going to be working in startup environments.
If you're going to go work for a fortune 50 you might be able to just mindlessly work on a single dialog box for years, never really knowing how it fits into the larger project.But I get hired as a white collar programmer and we often debate whether a degree is the sign of someone good or someone you want to avoid.
There are just as many sloppy CS majors who don't really care about programming and don't "get it".
At the end of the day I tend towards people who have projects they work on outside of work, as that shows me they're passionate enough about programming to enjoy it in their free time.I can fix a lack of education.
I can't fix a lack of enthusiasm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107944</id>
	<title>Think about "the human equation"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone with a broader education, including sociology, psychology, history etc.. might have a better understanding out how people will actually use the software in the wild.. potentially making better choices in usability, as well as language used in the documentation or the product.  Sociology might also help them see the "larger picture" of a project where someone who's knowledge is pigeonholed might view just a few elements of a project that they've worked with simply from the technical standpoint of "It works" without considering effects on the overall perception of the product from the end-user.<br>Another HUGE element where sociology, psychology, and history would be useful to draw upon are predicting the mistakes that end-users will make while using the product, and adjusting the user-interface to try and direct the user to the "right" choices for what they want to do.</p><p>The "blue collar" guys can certainly be given an element of a project and told "go".. but the "white collar" guys has to see how all the pieces fit together, and how they react with each other, and with the end-users, and the administrators.</p><p>One other thing to consider.. is that taking the longer path, with more education in different fields.. just makes the developer a more complete human being.  In case you've never thought about it.. shortcuts to anything tend to take away from the overall experience, as well as cheating the journeyer of all of the lessons and experiences that may come along the way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone with a broader education , including sociology , psychology , history etc.. might have a better understanding out how people will actually use the software in the wild.. potentially making better choices in usability , as well as language used in the documentation or the product .
Sociology might also help them see the " larger picture " of a project where someone who 's knowledge is pigeonholed might view just a few elements of a project that they 've worked with simply from the technical standpoint of " It works " without considering effects on the overall perception of the product from the end-user.Another HUGE element where sociology , psychology , and history would be useful to draw upon are predicting the mistakes that end-users will make while using the product , and adjusting the user-interface to try and direct the user to the " right " choices for what they want to do.The " blue collar " guys can certainly be given an element of a project and told " go " .. but the " white collar " guys has to see how all the pieces fit together , and how they react with each other , and with the end-users , and the administrators.One other thing to consider.. is that taking the longer path , with more education in different fields.. just makes the developer a more complete human being .
In case you 've never thought about it.. shortcuts to anything tend to take away from the overall experience , as well as cheating the journeyer of all of the lessons and experiences that may come along the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone with a broader education, including sociology, psychology, history etc.. might have a better understanding out how people will actually use the software in the wild.. potentially making better choices in usability, as well as language used in the documentation or the product.
Sociology might also help them see the "larger picture" of a project where someone who's knowledge is pigeonholed might view just a few elements of a project that they've worked with simply from the technical standpoint of "It works" without considering effects on the overall perception of the product from the end-user.Another HUGE element where sociology, psychology, and history would be useful to draw upon are predicting the mistakes that end-users will make while using the product, and adjusting the user-interface to try and direct the user to the "right" choices for what they want to do.The "blue collar" guys can certainly be given an element of a project and told "go".. but the "white collar" guys has to see how all the pieces fit together, and how they react with each other, and with the end-users, and the administrators.One other thing to consider.. is that taking the longer path, with more education in different fields.. just makes the developer a more complete human being.
In case you've never thought about it.. shortcuts to anything tend to take away from the overall experience, as well as cheating the journeyer of all of the lessons and experiences that may come along the way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107354</id>
	<title>The question cancells itself out</title>
	<author>Potor</author>
	<datestamp>1258314000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say that at university, one learns more than programming. If this is true, then the difference cannot just be a piece of paper.
</p><p>Don't you see that the (hopefully) liberal education one gets at university offers a different skill-set and broader world-view than one gets just simply learning to program?
</p><p>I think back to Madoff's programmers. Code monkeys were all he needed. This is not to say that these programmers were vocationally trained. But a good liberal education would have enabled them - and anybody who pays attention - to ask the kind of questions that go past algorithms and enter into wider categories.
</p><p>University is not for everyone - but for the right people, the intellectual and theoretical challenges of university opens minds, before it opens doors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say that at university , one learns more than programming .
If this is true , then the difference can not just be a piece of paper .
Do n't you see that the ( hopefully ) liberal education one gets at university offers a different skill-set and broader world-view than one gets just simply learning to program ?
I think back to Madoff 's programmers .
Code monkeys were all he needed .
This is not to say that these programmers were vocationally trained .
But a good liberal education would have enabled them - and anybody who pays attention - to ask the kind of questions that go past algorithms and enter into wider categories .
University is not for everyone - but for the right people , the intellectual and theoretical challenges of university opens minds , before it opens doors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say that at university, one learns more than programming.
If this is true, then the difference cannot just be a piece of paper.
Don't you see that the (hopefully) liberal education one gets at university offers a different skill-set and broader world-view than one gets just simply learning to program?
I think back to Madoff's programmers.
Code monkeys were all he needed.
This is not to say that these programmers were vocationally trained.
But a good liberal education would have enabled them - and anybody who pays attention - to ask the kind of questions that go past algorithms and enter into wider categories.
University is not for everyone - but for the right people, the intellectual and theoretical challenges of university opens minds, before it opens doors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108122</id>
	<title>eh</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1258318200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I reject the idea that the quality of a developer is primarily about "training". I want someone who's creative, intelligent, can intuit solutions to complex out-of-the-ordinary problems, has no problem expressing himself verbally and in written communication, etc.  If he has the right stuff then he'll figure out the rest on the job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I reject the idea that the quality of a developer is primarily about " training " .
I want someone who 's creative , intelligent , can intuit solutions to complex out-of-the-ordinary problems , has no problem expressing himself verbally and in written communication , etc .
If he has the right stuff then he 'll figure out the rest on the job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I reject the idea that the quality of a developer is primarily about "training".
I want someone who's creative, intelligent, can intuit solutions to complex out-of-the-ordinary problems, has no problem expressing himself verbally and in written communication, etc.
If he has the right stuff then he'll figure out the rest on the job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114540</id>
	<title>Education vs Certification</title>
	<author>soward</author>
	<datestamp>1258382700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>don't confuse your education with your certification. It's easy to do, but not that good for your long-term career goals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't confuse your education with your certification .
It 's easy to do , but not that good for your long-term career goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't confuse your education with your certification.
It's easy to do, but not that good for your long-term career goals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196</id>
	<title>Algorithms</title>
	<author>moo083</author>
	<datestamp>1258313280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my experience people who have gone to vocational schools do not have the same background in algorithms than do people who have gone to four year schools.  They do not have as expansive of knowledge in data structures and sorting algorithms and the like.  There are many jobs where optimizing is important and knowing which algorithm has the best run time in O() notation can be important.  They may know Java, but that doesn't mean that they can code just as well.  Just because someone knows how to use a typewriter doesn't mean they can write a book just as well as an English major.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience people who have gone to vocational schools do not have the same background in algorithms than do people who have gone to four year schools .
They do not have as expansive of knowledge in data structures and sorting algorithms and the like .
There are many jobs where optimizing is important and knowing which algorithm has the best run time in O ( ) notation can be important .
They may know Java , but that does n't mean that they can code just as well .
Just because someone knows how to use a typewriter does n't mean they can write a book just as well as an English major .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience people who have gone to vocational schools do not have the same background in algorithms than do people who have gone to four year schools.
They do not have as expansive of knowledge in data structures and sorting algorithms and the like.
There are many jobs where optimizing is important and knowing which algorithm has the best run time in O() notation can be important.
They may know Java, but that doesn't mean that they can code just as well.
Just because someone knows how to use a typewriter doesn't mean they can write a book just as well as an English major.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108238</id>
	<title>yes and no</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1258275660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is more to being a developer then being a good coder and as someone who had only partial training, I know the difference.
</p><p>Knowing the theory doesn't make you a good coder, but not knowing the theory makes being a good developer a lot harder. NOT because you might not have the actual skills, but because you can't talk the talk, although you can walk that walk.
</p><p>The bee does not how it can fly, it just does. The scientist knows not only how the bee flies, but birds and other insects as well, yet he shall never fly under his own power as long as he lives. Who is greater? The bee or the scientist?
</p><p>Michael Schumacher is famous for both being a record smashing F1 driver AND not knowing much about cars unlike many of his competitors who despite their better knowledge were slower.
</p><p>But then again, as said, being a developer is more then pumping out code, you got to be able to communicate what you do to others if you want the big bugs and there the theory helps, it helps in the simplest way because you will share a common set of words.
</p><p>I have only a partial education but it has helped me to "know" that there is more out there. I might not have the full sets of skills but at least I know there are skills out to be learned, if I need them and that helps.
</p><p>But yeah, I suppose that this debade will go on forever as us "blue collar" developers can name so many examples of "white collar" developers who ain't worth shit. At least the blue collar has proven himself over the years, many graduates have yet to do that.
</p><p>That is why any good boss will take diploma's as nothing more then a hint. The proof is in the actual work produced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is more to being a developer then being a good coder and as someone who had only partial training , I know the difference .
Knowing the theory does n't make you a good coder , but not knowing the theory makes being a good developer a lot harder .
NOT because you might not have the actual skills , but because you ca n't talk the talk , although you can walk that walk .
The bee does not how it can fly , it just does .
The scientist knows not only how the bee flies , but birds and other insects as well , yet he shall never fly under his own power as long as he lives .
Who is greater ?
The bee or the scientist ?
Michael Schumacher is famous for both being a record smashing F1 driver AND not knowing much about cars unlike many of his competitors who despite their better knowledge were slower .
But then again , as said , being a developer is more then pumping out code , you got to be able to communicate what you do to others if you want the big bugs and there the theory helps , it helps in the simplest way because you will share a common set of words .
I have only a partial education but it has helped me to " know " that there is more out there .
I might not have the full sets of skills but at least I know there are skills out to be learned , if I need them and that helps .
But yeah , I suppose that this debade will go on forever as us " blue collar " developers can name so many examples of " white collar " developers who ai n't worth shit .
At least the blue collar has proven himself over the years , many graduates have yet to do that .
That is why any good boss will take diploma 's as nothing more then a hint .
The proof is in the actual work produced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is more to being a developer then being a good coder and as someone who had only partial training, I know the difference.
Knowing the theory doesn't make you a good coder, but not knowing the theory makes being a good developer a lot harder.
NOT because you might not have the actual skills, but because you can't talk the talk, although you can walk that walk.
The bee does not how it can fly, it just does.
The scientist knows not only how the bee flies, but birds and other insects as well, yet he shall never fly under his own power as long as he lives.
Who is greater?
The bee or the scientist?
Michael Schumacher is famous for both being a record smashing F1 driver AND not knowing much about cars unlike many of his competitors who despite their better knowledge were slower.
But then again, as said, being a developer is more then pumping out code, you got to be able to communicate what you do to others if you want the big bugs and there the theory helps, it helps in the simplest way because you will share a common set of words.
I have only a partial education but it has helped me to "know" that there is more out there.
I might not have the full sets of skills but at least I know there are skills out to be learned, if I need them and that helps.
But yeah, I suppose that this debade will go on forever as us "blue collar" developers can name so many examples of "white collar" developers who ain't worth shit.
At least the blue collar has proven himself over the years, many graduates have yet to do that.
That is why any good boss will take diploma's as nothing more then a hint.
The proof is in the actual work produced.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110548</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258291740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Several points:</p><p>* Computer code does not use grammatically correct format.  Grammar should not be a measurement of coding skill.<br>* Social skills come in many forms but I'd have to say that with coding, sharing information freely is among the most essential.  Personally, I see the college grad crowd as people who use their accolades to slam the door on the competition.  Too bad.  Those diplomas are only a test of their programming skills during a certain 4 year time frame.  Nothing stays the same in a tech field.<br>* Programmers are self-destructive in their ability to label people with their own worst character flaws and then carry the accusation to the point of demonstrating their own absurdity.  Accept the fact that the rest of the world really, really is bored to tears at what you do for a living.  It's not a personality flaw to be a programmer but it is a liability to not be able to switch off the perfectionist attitude when in a social environment.  Personal attacks online is a sure sign that you're taking yourself way too seriously.<br>* Programmers never grow old gracefully.  It's a young man's game but that doesn't mean that you can't have a team.  Usually, coders aren't involved in the core function of a business so they have to work harder for respect in the management hierarchy.  Dragging each other down is for kids.  Name calling?  Pathetic!<br>* By my observation, the most important intangible skill that a computer person needs to learn is the ability to jabber about spectator sports in some kind of politically sterile, male bonding ritual that is almost a religion for non-technical people.  Of course, if you've got that kind of pack mentality to begin with, you're probably not a good programmer.  You're a good-ol' boy, whether you blow swear words or PHD's out your arse!  And you're probably a habitual liar.  Stop trying to be something you're not and practice something called self-respect, THEN you can start respecting other programmers.  If that fails, you should find a job more suited to you.</p><p>The only bit of trolling that need be added to this slap-fest is to bring up the discrepancies in behavior and treatment between the married people and the single people and also the male/female debate.  There should be equal pay for equal work at all times.  Anyone who thinks he or she has special, intangible skills that entitle him or her to something extra really needs to get over his or her self.</p><p>(I could have easily said "themself" in my last sentence but I'm sure that some grammar NAZI would have decided that I had nothing important to say since I scrapped proper grammar in favor of not annoying people with extra verbiage.  Instead, I wrote this!  Kind of makes you think, eh?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Several points : * Computer code does not use grammatically correct format .
Grammar should not be a measurement of coding skill .
* Social skills come in many forms but I 'd have to say that with coding , sharing information freely is among the most essential .
Personally , I see the college grad crowd as people who use their accolades to slam the door on the competition .
Too bad .
Those diplomas are only a test of their programming skills during a certain 4 year time frame .
Nothing stays the same in a tech field .
* Programmers are self-destructive in their ability to label people with their own worst character flaws and then carry the accusation to the point of demonstrating their own absurdity .
Accept the fact that the rest of the world really , really is bored to tears at what you do for a living .
It 's not a personality flaw to be a programmer but it is a liability to not be able to switch off the perfectionist attitude when in a social environment .
Personal attacks online is a sure sign that you 're taking yourself way too seriously .
* Programmers never grow old gracefully .
It 's a young man 's game but that does n't mean that you ca n't have a team .
Usually , coders are n't involved in the core function of a business so they have to work harder for respect in the management hierarchy .
Dragging each other down is for kids .
Name calling ?
Pathetic ! * By my observation , the most important intangible skill that a computer person needs to learn is the ability to jabber about spectator sports in some kind of politically sterile , male bonding ritual that is almost a religion for non-technical people .
Of course , if you 've got that kind of pack mentality to begin with , you 're probably not a good programmer .
You 're a good-ol ' boy , whether you blow swear words or PHD 's out your arse !
And you 're probably a habitual liar .
Stop trying to be something you 're not and practice something called self-respect , THEN you can start respecting other programmers .
If that fails , you should find a job more suited to you.The only bit of trolling that need be added to this slap-fest is to bring up the discrepancies in behavior and treatment between the married people and the single people and also the male/female debate .
There should be equal pay for equal work at all times .
Anyone who thinks he or she has special , intangible skills that entitle him or her to something extra really needs to get over his or her self .
( I could have easily said " themself " in my last sentence but I 'm sure that some grammar NAZI would have decided that I had nothing important to say since I scrapped proper grammar in favor of not annoying people with extra verbiage .
Instead , I wrote this !
Kind of makes you think , eh ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several points:* Computer code does not use grammatically correct format.
Grammar should not be a measurement of coding skill.
* Social skills come in many forms but I'd have to say that with coding, sharing information freely is among the most essential.
Personally, I see the college grad crowd as people who use their accolades to slam the door on the competition.
Too bad.
Those diplomas are only a test of their programming skills during a certain 4 year time frame.
Nothing stays the same in a tech field.
* Programmers are self-destructive in their ability to label people with their own worst character flaws and then carry the accusation to the point of demonstrating their own absurdity.
Accept the fact that the rest of the world really, really is bored to tears at what you do for a living.
It's not a personality flaw to be a programmer but it is a liability to not be able to switch off the perfectionist attitude when in a social environment.
Personal attacks online is a sure sign that you're taking yourself way too seriously.
* Programmers never grow old gracefully.
It's a young man's game but that doesn't mean that you can't have a team.
Usually, coders aren't involved in the core function of a business so they have to work harder for respect in the management hierarchy.
Dragging each other down is for kids.
Name calling?
Pathetic!* By my observation, the most important intangible skill that a computer person needs to learn is the ability to jabber about spectator sports in some kind of politically sterile, male bonding ritual that is almost a religion for non-technical people.
Of course, if you've got that kind of pack mentality to begin with, you're probably not a good programmer.
You're a good-ol' boy, whether you blow swear words or PHD's out your arse!
And you're probably a habitual liar.
Stop trying to be something you're not and practice something called self-respect, THEN you can start respecting other programmers.
If that fails, you should find a job more suited to you.The only bit of trolling that need be added to this slap-fest is to bring up the discrepancies in behavior and treatment between the married people and the single people and also the male/female debate.
There should be equal pay for equal work at all times.
Anyone who thinks he or she has special, intangible skills that entitle him or her to something extra really needs to get over his or her self.
(I could have easily said "themself" in my last sentence but I'm sure that some grammar NAZI would have decided that I had nothing important to say since I scrapped proper grammar in favor of not annoying people with extra verbiage.
Instead, I wrote this!
Kind of makes you think, eh?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107876</id>
	<title>Is that wat's it really about?</title>
	<author>j741</author>
	<datestamp>1258317120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So why is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree?  Why does [any] industry keep emphasizing this difference &mdash; and generally giving better pay to four-year grads?"</p></div><p>I believe this result is not about blue-collar vs white collar, nor more education vs less education.  I believe this is about a person's ability to understand and use circumstances that are not specifically related to the exact task at hand.  In the case of a software developer or a hardware engineer, those with the best coding skills or engineering skills may not be fully understanding of the true needs of the product owner, product user, or project manager (which are often poorly presented, and require interpretation).  I think that those who have a more encompassing education also generally have more exposure to the rest of the world, which can impact the project at hand.  Therefore they are more likely to recognize and react to things that affect the project than those who are more purely focused on the details of the work at hand.  This has value in the real world, and I think this may be why those types of people are generally more highly paid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So why is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree ?
Why does [ any ] industry keep emphasizing this difference    and generally giving better pay to four-year grads ?
" I believe this result is not about blue-collar vs white collar , nor more education vs less education .
I believe this is about a person 's ability to understand and use circumstances that are not specifically related to the exact task at hand .
In the case of a software developer or a hardware engineer , those with the best coding skills or engineering skills may not be fully understanding of the true needs of the product owner , product user , or project manager ( which are often poorly presented , and require interpretation ) .
I think that those who have a more encompassing education also generally have more exposure to the rest of the world , which can impact the project at hand .
Therefore they are more likely to recognize and react to things that affect the project than those who are more purely focused on the details of the work at hand .
This has value in the real world , and I think this may be why those types of people are generally more highly paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So why is there a stigma attached to not having a four-year degree?
Why does [any] industry keep emphasizing this difference — and generally giving better pay to four-year grads?
"I believe this result is not about blue-collar vs white collar, nor more education vs less education.
I believe this is about a person's ability to understand and use circumstances that are not specifically related to the exact task at hand.
In the case of a software developer or a hardware engineer, those with the best coding skills or engineering skills may not be fully understanding of the true needs of the product owner, product user, or project manager (which are often poorly presented, and require interpretation).
I think that those who have a more encompassing education also generally have more exposure to the rest of the world, which can impact the project at hand.
Therefore they are more likely to recognize and react to things that affect the project than those who are more purely focused on the details of the work at hand.
This has value in the real world, and I think this may be why those types of people are generally more highly paid.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109146</id>
	<title>Re:White collar coders make better sheep</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1258281600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more "disciplined" which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders. I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student, but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime, workload, etc.</i></p><p>However the programmer without a degree has to worry they might be fired or laid off over someone with a degree, so they may be less likely to complain.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more " disciplined " which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders .
I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student , but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime , workload , etc.However the programmer without a degree has to worry they might be fired or laid off over someone with a degree , so they may be less likely to complain .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some reason in my experience the degreed developers tend to be more "disciplined" which at least in the companies I have worked for means they are more likely to allow themselves to be pushed around and are less likely to question methods and proceeders.
I am not sure if its the massive debt hanging over their heads or simply the years of being a dedicated student, but they just tend on average to be more willing to keep their mouth shut and keep typing while complaining less about things like overtime, workload, etc.However the programmer without a degree has to worry they might be fired or laid off over someone with a degree, so they may be less likely to complain.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115442</id>
	<title>Nice troll story!</title>
	<author>srussell</author>
	<datestamp>1258387320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It doesn't get any better than that.  But feeding the trolls is fun!
<p>
I don't know about other people with 4 year CS degrees, but I took three years of calculus (in addition to numerous other math classes); is the poster suggesting that either vocational schools cram four years of math into a two year program, or that math isn't an important part of computer science?  Probably the latter.  Which would explain a lot of things I've seen in industry over the years, actually.
</p><p>
--- SER</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't get any better than that .
But feeding the trolls is fun !
I do n't know about other people with 4 year CS degrees , but I took three years of calculus ( in addition to numerous other math classes ) ; is the poster suggesting that either vocational schools cram four years of math into a two year program , or that math is n't an important part of computer science ?
Probably the latter .
Which would explain a lot of things I 've seen in industry over the years , actually .
--- SER</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't get any better than that.
But feeding the trolls is fun!
I don't know about other people with 4 year CS degrees, but I took three years of calculus (in addition to numerous other math classes); is the poster suggesting that either vocational schools cram four years of math into a two year program, or that math isn't an important part of computer science?
Probably the latter.
Which would explain a lot of things I've seen in industry over the years, actually.
--- SER</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107286</id>
	<title>Perfect price setting requires perfect information</title>
	<author>pschmied</author>
	<datestamp>1258313760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a free market, we would expect better coders to make more money than less good coders. The problem is that this is predicated on having perfect information (i.e. being able to actually rank coders by quality). In the marketplace, it's actually quite hard to know how good coders are relative to their peers. Sure, you could test everyone, but then that assumes your test is correct and that you have the time and money to administer it.</p><p>Therefore, employers look for discriminators. One of those discriminators is a four year degree. Though we anecdotally hear about impractical academic CS majors who can't code, most four year CS grads have a modicum of understanding.</p><p>Additionally, a friend of mine was recently in the position to hire. I asked him about the four year degree issue because my friend usually belongs to the school of "put up or shut up." His opinion was that a four year degree was important not just because of coding chops, but *because* of all the other classes that are typically required in a four year program. For him, having someone who could code and also write coherent sentences and speak somewhat intelligently with people who might be inclined to invest in the company.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a free market , we would expect better coders to make more money than less good coders .
The problem is that this is predicated on having perfect information ( i.e .
being able to actually rank coders by quality ) .
In the marketplace , it 's actually quite hard to know how good coders are relative to their peers .
Sure , you could test everyone , but then that assumes your test is correct and that you have the time and money to administer it.Therefore , employers look for discriminators .
One of those discriminators is a four year degree .
Though we anecdotally hear about impractical academic CS majors who ca n't code , most four year CS grads have a modicum of understanding.Additionally , a friend of mine was recently in the position to hire .
I asked him about the four year degree issue because my friend usually belongs to the school of " put up or shut up .
" His opinion was that a four year degree was important not just because of coding chops , but * because * of all the other classes that are typically required in a four year program .
For him , having someone who could code and also write coherent sentences and speak somewhat intelligently with people who might be inclined to invest in the company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a free market, we would expect better coders to make more money than less good coders.
The problem is that this is predicated on having perfect information (i.e.
being able to actually rank coders by quality).
In the marketplace, it's actually quite hard to know how good coders are relative to their peers.
Sure, you could test everyone, but then that assumes your test is correct and that you have the time and money to administer it.Therefore, employers look for discriminators.
One of those discriminators is a four year degree.
Though we anecdotally hear about impractical academic CS majors who can't code, most four year CS grads have a modicum of understanding.Additionally, a friend of mine was recently in the position to hire.
I asked him about the four year degree issue because my friend usually belongs to the school of "put up or shut up.
" His opinion was that a four year degree was important not just because of coding chops, but *because* of all the other classes that are typically required in a four year program.
For him, having someone who could code and also write coherent sentences and speak somewhat intelligently with people who might be inclined to invest in the company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108314</id>
	<title>You just sobbered up</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1258276140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Slashdot, what the hell happened to you? You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack. You've really let yourself go.</i></p><p>Dear ex-slashdot-loving geek. I gained 20lbs tops, and I've always smoked crack. You just sobered up. I don't care if you love me or not, as long as we can boink.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot , what the hell happened to you ?
You used to be interesting and hot , but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack .
You 've really let yourself go.Dear ex-slashdot-loving geek .
I gained 20lbs tops , and I 've always smoked crack .
You just sobered up .
I do n't care if you love me or not , as long as we can boink .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot, what the hell happened to you?
You used to be interesting and hot, but you gained 400 lbs and started smoking crack.
You've really let yourself go.Dear ex-slashdot-loving geek.
I gained 20lbs tops, and I've always smoked crack.
You just sobered up.
I don't care if you love me or not, as long as we can boink.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107696</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did you figure out which algorithm you needed? If you have a problem and it can be solved efficiently by using a Fast Fourier transform, how do you discover this if you've never heard of Fourier transforms?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did you figure out which algorithm you needed ?
If you have a problem and it can be solved efficiently by using a Fast Fourier transform , how do you discover this if you 've never heard of Fourier transforms ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did you figure out which algorithm you needed?
If you have a problem and it can be solved efficiently by using a Fast Fourier transform, how do you discover this if you've never heard of Fourier transforms?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180</id>
	<title>Slaves wear collars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wear a T-shirt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wear a T-shirt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wear a T-shirt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107272</id>
	<title>Design patterns and architecture</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work with a lot of guys without degrees and they are great coders, but when it comes to designing software for the long-term, they need a lot of pushes in other directions. Initially when I started working at my current company, I was ridiculed for my academic approach to designing software using design patterns and architectural expertise, but I've become the go-to guy and that is because I write very stable software that survives huge design changes and iteration.</p><p>Academics counts and frankly, most of that is not learned in school but in self-study. If you read and learn the theory of engineering, then you are a bigger benefit to your employer, you'll interview better, and in the end, you'll earn more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work with a lot of guys without degrees and they are great coders , but when it comes to designing software for the long-term , they need a lot of pushes in other directions .
Initially when I started working at my current company , I was ridiculed for my academic approach to designing software using design patterns and architectural expertise , but I 've become the go-to guy and that is because I write very stable software that survives huge design changes and iteration.Academics counts and frankly , most of that is not learned in school but in self-study .
If you read and learn the theory of engineering , then you are a bigger benefit to your employer , you 'll interview better , and in the end , you 'll earn more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work with a lot of guys without degrees and they are great coders, but when it comes to designing software for the long-term, they need a lot of pushes in other directions.
Initially when I started working at my current company, I was ridiculed for my academic approach to designing software using design patterns and architectural expertise, but I've become the go-to guy and that is because I write very stable software that survives huge design changes and iteration.Academics counts and frankly, most of that is not learned in school but in self-study.
If you read and learn the theory of engineering, then you are a bigger benefit to your employer, you'll interview better, and in the end, you'll earn more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112262</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>johncadengo</author>
	<datestamp>1258309980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I agree with acidfast.</p><p>Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning, or know their correct spelling. This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.</p><p>For example: "Queue awkward silence."</p><p>The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence." It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects. How does one "queue" awkward silence?</p></div><p>If it weren't for the first mistake dealing with the misuse of the word quite, I would've attributed his phrasing to a clever pun.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with acidfast.Furthermore , Mr. Spiegel , you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning , or know their correct spelling .
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.For example : " Queue awkward silence .
" The correct spelling is " cue awkward silence .
" It comes from stage and movie production , where the producer will " cue " actors , lights , or special effects .
How does one " queue " awkward silence ? If it were n't for the first mistake dealing with the misuse of the word quite , I would 've attributed his phrasing to a clever pun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with acidfast.Furthermore, Mr. Spiegel, you are keen to use cliche phrases without even putting in the effort to understand their meaning, or know their correct spelling.
This helps you come across as a pompous idiot.For example: "Queue awkward silence.
"The correct spelling is "cue awkward silence.
" It comes from stage and movie production, where the producer will "cue" actors, lights, or special effects.
How does one "queue" awkward silence?If it weren't for the first mistake dealing with the misuse of the word quite, I would've attributed his phrasing to a clever pun.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109924</id>
	<title>I like my piece of paper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258287120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got a BS in CS from a liberal arts college.  It was like getting 2 degrees.  I hated the non core liberal arts classes at the time but now, 15years later with outsourcing and the shitty economy I feel like my education was very well worth it.  I do not have to fear a changing economy because my education has prepared me to survive.  Tech schools have their place but a true education will last a lifetime.  The ability to critically think and problem solve is an asset an education provides.   Task based trainings are valuable but I think training for a profession is much different.<br>Of course the cost benefit of college now a days is much different then when I graduated but I think folks that knock college wish they attended.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a BS in CS from a liberal arts college .
It was like getting 2 degrees .
I hated the non core liberal arts classes at the time but now , 15years later with outsourcing and the shitty economy I feel like my education was very well worth it .
I do not have to fear a changing economy because my education has prepared me to survive .
Tech schools have their place but a true education will last a lifetime .
The ability to critically think and problem solve is an asset an education provides .
Task based trainings are valuable but I think training for a profession is much different.Of course the cost benefit of college now a days is much different then when I graduated but I think folks that knock college wish they attended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a BS in CS from a liberal arts college.
It was like getting 2 degrees.
I hated the non core liberal arts classes at the time but now, 15years later with outsourcing and the shitty economy I feel like my education was very well worth it.
I do not have to fear a changing economy because my education has prepared me to survive.
Tech schools have their place but a true education will last a lifetime.
The ability to critically think and problem solve is an asset an education provides.
Task based trainings are valuable but I think training for a profession is much different.Of course the cost benefit of college now a days is much different then when I graduated but I think folks that knock college wish they attended.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108348</id>
	<title>A well rounded education</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258276320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what's wrong with studying History or Sociology?</p><p>Might it not be useful to understand the historical divisions between Suni and Shiite, or the evolution of the Corporation as an organizing mechanism of capitalism? Couldn't one apply knowledge of collective behavior and group dynamics?</p><p>If you ever want to leave you coder-cave, having a broad-based education is tremendously useful. Nobody would expect a CS major to have a deep understanding of 17th century French literature but a good, four-year liberal arts education will give a student tools to at least engage intelligently on a range of topics.</p><p>Either that, or you can look down your nose at everybody else. Either way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what 's wrong with studying History or Sociology ? Might it not be useful to understand the historical divisions between Suni and Shiite , or the evolution of the Corporation as an organizing mechanism of capitalism ?
Could n't one apply knowledge of collective behavior and group dynamics ? If you ever want to leave you coder-cave , having a broad-based education is tremendously useful .
Nobody would expect a CS major to have a deep understanding of 17th century French literature but a good , four-year liberal arts education will give a student tools to at least engage intelligently on a range of topics.Either that , or you can look down your nose at everybody else .
Either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what's wrong with studying History or Sociology?Might it not be useful to understand the historical divisions between Suni and Shiite, or the evolution of the Corporation as an organizing mechanism of capitalism?
Couldn't one apply knowledge of collective behavior and group dynamics?If you ever want to leave you coder-cave, having a broad-based education is tremendously useful.
Nobody would expect a CS major to have a deep understanding of 17th century French literature but a good, four-year liberal arts education will give a student tools to at least engage intelligently on a range of topics.Either that, or you can look down your nose at everybody else.
Either way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111102</id>
	<title>My take</title>
	<author>Dr Fro</author>
	<datestamp>1258297560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(Background - BS in Computer Science). Most non-degree mill CS degrees are about theory. My university had 1 "Software Engineering" program where you had to work as a team (not a required course). Obviously, working as a team in SW Development is very important in practically all projects in the corporate world. Given those 2 statements, no surprise that I learned more what I needed to be successful at my job in my first year of full-time employment that at school (not including the lack of "how to deal with all the business stuff that has nothing to do with real work" course). So, a 4-year degree is no indication of practical success (and in my personal experience) neither is a master's or PHD).</p><p>Yet, given all that, my guess would be that if you went to a vocational school, HR may well assume it's because you couldn't get into a "real" college? And given what happened turn of the century - "I have a degree in HTML programming"-types - people probably are wary of applicants without any "proof" of real work. Given that the tools of the trade are so readily available (a computer), there's plenty of people out there who think they can program because of going through a few "program in VB in 30 days". A good technical interview should weed those out, but cheaper to first filter out people who don't even have a degree.</p><p>Now, there's plenty of cases where someone has the technical knowledge and no degree and has proved it, but sometimes job requirements are not bendable by the person doing the interviewing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( Background - BS in Computer Science ) .
Most non-degree mill CS degrees are about theory .
My university had 1 " Software Engineering " program where you had to work as a team ( not a required course ) .
Obviously , working as a team in SW Development is very important in practically all projects in the corporate world .
Given those 2 statements , no surprise that I learned more what I needed to be successful at my job in my first year of full-time employment that at school ( not including the lack of " how to deal with all the business stuff that has nothing to do with real work " course ) .
So , a 4-year degree is no indication of practical success ( and in my personal experience ) neither is a master 's or PHD ) .Yet , given all that , my guess would be that if you went to a vocational school , HR may well assume it 's because you could n't get into a " real " college ?
And given what happened turn of the century - " I have a degree in HTML programming " -types - people probably are wary of applicants without any " proof " of real work .
Given that the tools of the trade are so readily available ( a computer ) , there 's plenty of people out there who think they can program because of going through a few " program in VB in 30 days " .
A good technical interview should weed those out , but cheaper to first filter out people who do n't even have a degree.Now , there 's plenty of cases where someone has the technical knowledge and no degree and has proved it , but sometimes job requirements are not bendable by the person doing the interviewing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Background - BS in Computer Science).
Most non-degree mill CS degrees are about theory.
My university had 1 "Software Engineering" program where you had to work as a team (not a required course).
Obviously, working as a team in SW Development is very important in practically all projects in the corporate world.
Given those 2 statements, no surprise that I learned more what I needed to be successful at my job in my first year of full-time employment that at school (not including the lack of "how to deal with all the business stuff that has nothing to do with real work" course).
So, a 4-year degree is no indication of practical success (and in my personal experience) neither is a master's or PHD).Yet, given all that, my guess would be that if you went to a vocational school, HR may well assume it's because you couldn't get into a "real" college?
And given what happened turn of the century - "I have a degree in HTML programming"-types - people probably are wary of applicants without any "proof" of real work.
Given that the tools of the trade are so readily available (a computer), there's plenty of people out there who think they can program because of going through a few "program in VB in 30 days".
A good technical interview should weed those out, but cheaper to first filter out people who don't even have a degree.Now, there's plenty of cases where someone has the technical knowledge and no degree and has proved it, but sometimes job requirements are not bendable by the person doing the interviewing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109078</id>
	<title>SomeMSc</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258281000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's face it, it was stupid to corner him. It demonstrates a lack of maturity that these extra 2 years you spent in school should have given you.</p><p>The point is, he may very well be even more skilled than you are, on technical stuff. That's were his interest is and where he is likely to spend more time than you actually do. (simply, at same "raw" skill level, you can't compete if you spend less time on the subject)</p><p>On the contrary, you may be better prepared for a management position, given your education level and open mindness (at least you should).</p><p>As for me, I have experienced both situations.</p><p>I started programming at age 12, out of passion. I worked punctually on dev stuff to make some money from 16 to 20. I learned quite a lot and  managed to get some respect for my skills and publications (IT security), but I soon realized that you need a degree to get into the real stuff. Otherwise, people just don't take you seriously (even more when you are young).</p><p>Now, I enjoy coding, but not like I did at first. I can't spend countless hours reading books and API anymore, as I used to do. It is just that I am interested by others things that come around the coding: the business side.</p><p>Anyways, what really matters is to be happy with what you do.</p><p>My 2 cents (I have an MSc in CS and an MSc in embedded software).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's face it , it was stupid to corner him .
It demonstrates a lack of maturity that these extra 2 years you spent in school should have given you.The point is , he may very well be even more skilled than you are , on technical stuff .
That 's were his interest is and where he is likely to spend more time than you actually do .
( simply , at same " raw " skill level , you ca n't compete if you spend less time on the subject ) On the contrary , you may be better prepared for a management position , given your education level and open mindness ( at least you should ) .As for me , I have experienced both situations.I started programming at age 12 , out of passion .
I worked punctually on dev stuff to make some money from 16 to 20 .
I learned quite a lot and managed to get some respect for my skills and publications ( IT security ) , but I soon realized that you need a degree to get into the real stuff .
Otherwise , people just do n't take you seriously ( even more when you are young ) .Now , I enjoy coding , but not like I did at first .
I ca n't spend countless hours reading books and API anymore , as I used to do .
It is just that I am interested by others things that come around the coding : the business side.Anyways , what really matters is to be happy with what you do.My 2 cents ( I have an MSc in CS and an MSc in embedded software ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's face it, it was stupid to corner him.
It demonstrates a lack of maturity that these extra 2 years you spent in school should have given you.The point is, he may very well be even more skilled than you are, on technical stuff.
That's were his interest is and where he is likely to spend more time than you actually do.
(simply, at same "raw" skill level, you can't compete if you spend less time on the subject)On the contrary, you may be better prepared for a management position, given your education level and open mindness (at least you should).As for me, I have experienced both situations.I started programming at age 12, out of passion.
I worked punctually on dev stuff to make some money from 16 to 20.
I learned quite a lot and  managed to get some respect for my skills and publications (IT security), but I soon realized that you need a degree to get into the real stuff.
Otherwise, people just don't take you seriously (even more when you are young).Now, I enjoy coding, but not like I did at first.
I can't spend countless hours reading books and API anymore, as I used to do.
It is just that I am interested by others things that come around the coding: the business side.Anyways, what really matters is to be happy with what you do.My 2 cents (I have an MSc in CS and an MSc in embedded software).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107316</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>naw your just a jackass grammer nazi</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>naw your just a jackass grammer nazi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>naw your just a jackass grammer nazi</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109008</id>
	<title>I have no degree at all</title>
	<author>TonyToews</author>
	<datestamp>1258280460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't have a degree or 2 year certificate or anything.  And yet I've been doing software development for the past 30 years.  I'll never work as an employee for large companies or governments but then I couldn't stand the culture anyhow.

I learned to program at the local college while in high school on punched cards.  Programming is a passion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a degree or 2 year certificate or anything .
And yet I 've been doing software development for the past 30 years .
I 'll never work as an employee for large companies or governments but then I could n't stand the culture anyhow .
I learned to program at the local college while in high school on punched cards .
Programming is a passion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a degree or 2 year certificate or anything.
And yet I've been doing software development for the past 30 years.
I'll never work as an employee for large companies or governments but then I couldn't stand the culture anyhow.
I learned to program at the local college while in high school on punched cards.
Programming is a passion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107302</id>
	<title>Degree, or four years of experience?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Back when I started out, I chose the latter.   If I interview a developer today, I want to see their code, not their paper credentials.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Back when I started out , I chose the latter .
If I interview a developer today , I want to see their code , not their paper credentials.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Back when I started out, I chose the latter.
If I interview a developer today, I want to see their code, not their paper credentials.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108358</id>
	<title>I think we're missing the point</title>
	<author>palmerj3</author>
	<datestamp>1258276380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am a blue color developer, and I work with a very talented white color developer.

I have to say, that this argument about who is better and why is really missing the point.  No matter who you are, are you developing great software that people actually use and benefit from?  Are you creative, and do you have a passion for writing great software?

Blue or white color, the above is what really matters.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a blue color developer , and I work with a very talented white color developer .
I have to say , that this argument about who is better and why is really missing the point .
No matter who you are , are you developing great software that people actually use and benefit from ?
Are you creative , and do you have a passion for writing great software ?
Blue or white color , the above is what really matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a blue color developer, and I work with a very talented white color developer.
I have to say, that this argument about who is better and why is really missing the point.
No matter who you are, are you developing great software that people actually use and benefit from?
Are you creative, and do you have a passion for writing great software?
Blue or white color, the above is what really matters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107902</id>
	<title>How about a read 4 year degree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258317180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I went to a university and got a 4 year degree in Computer Science....  I spent 4 years studying many apsects of computer science...didn't waste time on non computer/IT related stuff....  that was back whe a degree was a chance to focus on your vocation...not some "high school" extention with broad skills.... So do I see my 4 year degree as more valuable than a 2 year vocational course...hell yeah!  is what I learned still relevant today....  But I did at least spend that time on Technology subjects,  not all degrees contain other subjects.  Sure learning to program is great,  but a longer course can cover so much more.  From understnading silicon, curcuit board design, VLSI, device driver writing, microcode development...  Database design,  inteligent systems, Computer graphics,  OO design and development....oh and some programming...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to a university and got a 4 year degree in Computer Science.... I spent 4 years studying many apsects of computer science...did n't waste time on non computer/IT related stuff.... that was back whe a degree was a chance to focus on your vocation...not some " high school " extention with broad skills.... So do I see my 4 year degree as more valuable than a 2 year vocational course...hell yeah !
is what I learned still relevant today.... But I did at least spend that time on Technology subjects , not all degrees contain other subjects .
Sure learning to program is great , but a longer course can cover so much more .
From understnading silicon , curcuit board design , VLSI , device driver writing , microcode development... Database design , inteligent systems , Computer graphics , OO design and development....oh and some programming.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to a university and got a 4 year degree in Computer Science....  I spent 4 years studying many apsects of computer science...didn't waste time on non computer/IT related stuff....  that was back whe a degree was a chance to focus on your vocation...not some "high school" extention with broad skills.... So do I see my 4 year degree as more valuable than a 2 year vocational course...hell yeah!
is what I learned still relevant today....  But I did at least spend that time on Technology subjects,  not all degrees contain other subjects.
Sure learning to program is great,  but a longer course can cover so much more.
From understnading silicon, curcuit board design, VLSI, device driver writing, microcode development...  Database design,  inteligent systems, Computer graphics,  OO design and development....oh and some programming...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108700</id>
	<title>Re:Please no...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258278360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its like bringing up cases of racism in a 'mostly' non-racist society. You try not to think about hating group X, but there's just something about them that annoys you, and by not associating with group X I feel like I'm not discriminating against them. In the end a question like this just makes you feel dirtier.</p><p>The OP did a very bad job in framing their question, but the question holds merit."Is a graduate from a 4-year university any more likely to succeed in your company than a 2-year collage/trade/poly-tech/overthephone/overtheinternet graduate?" Just as important as the original question, we have to realize that we all have built-in discrimination in one form or another against anyone who took a different path than yourself.</p><p>From my personal bias, I get agitated that incompetent nitwits with university degrees get hired above my pay grade because I only worked my ass off learning 8 courses / semester for 2 years at a poly-tech instead of most universities which suggest 4-5? courses per semester for 4 years at a typical university. I respect smart, performance oriented people who benefit everyone they work with that have a can-do and hopefully pragmatic approach to their daily work. That person could come from collage, university, or be completely uneducated and I'd appreciate them all the same.</p><p>Other annoyances (possibly off-topic):<br>1. Pretty much all IT/Programming job applications specify "Bachelors or higher" in their job postings. Most of the time when they realize you've been working in the industry for 10 years they could care less about where you went to school. As a senior development job, they should more be asking, "So what have you done with yourself since graduating?". Even if the term is thrown in everywhere, it still hurts to be deselected before even applying.</p><p>2. Our company seems to promote the least capable programmers to become technical managers. Because we've basically stopped hiring junior developers (note to everyone, this is a big fat warning sign that your company is heading into stagnation) the number of actual promotions that occur in the company are very very few. The few people that have made the step up have been by and large the worst coders we've ever had (as full times, contractors on the other hand...). This tells me that they've either got the best soft-skills in the world, or someone's giving them the step up because they're too embarrassed or frightened to lay them off. Now mind you, all of the promotions I'm talking about are very technical oriented jobs that require expertise to make sane judgments, not line manager who's technical merit is a nice-to-have.</p><p>3. Every PHD I've ever met has been pretentious, pompous, and non-pragmatic. Their production always under-exceeded their peers. Its really depressing, because I know there must be are a lot of really great PHD's out there, but my personal experiences have been clouded in a small sample of pure mediocrity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its like bringing up cases of racism in a 'mostly ' non-racist society .
You try not to think about hating group X , but there 's just something about them that annoys you , and by not associating with group X I feel like I 'm not discriminating against them .
In the end a question like this just makes you feel dirtier.The OP did a very bad job in framing their question , but the question holds merit .
" Is a graduate from a 4-year university any more likely to succeed in your company than a 2-year collage/trade/poly-tech/overthephone/overtheinternet graduate ?
" Just as important as the original question , we have to realize that we all have built-in discrimination in one form or another against anyone who took a different path than yourself.From my personal bias , I get agitated that incompetent nitwits with university degrees get hired above my pay grade because I only worked my ass off learning 8 courses / semester for 2 years at a poly-tech instead of most universities which suggest 4-5 ?
courses per semester for 4 years at a typical university .
I respect smart , performance oriented people who benefit everyone they work with that have a can-do and hopefully pragmatic approach to their daily work .
That person could come from collage , university , or be completely uneducated and I 'd appreciate them all the same.Other annoyances ( possibly off-topic ) : 1 .
Pretty much all IT/Programming job applications specify " Bachelors or higher " in their job postings .
Most of the time when they realize you 've been working in the industry for 10 years they could care less about where you went to school .
As a senior development job , they should more be asking , " So what have you done with yourself since graduating ? " .
Even if the term is thrown in everywhere , it still hurts to be deselected before even applying.2 .
Our company seems to promote the least capable programmers to become technical managers .
Because we 've basically stopped hiring junior developers ( note to everyone , this is a big fat warning sign that your company is heading into stagnation ) the number of actual promotions that occur in the company are very very few .
The few people that have made the step up have been by and large the worst coders we 've ever had ( as full times , contractors on the other hand... ) .
This tells me that they 've either got the best soft-skills in the world , or someone 's giving them the step up because they 're too embarrassed or frightened to lay them off .
Now mind you , all of the promotions I 'm talking about are very technical oriented jobs that require expertise to make sane judgments , not line manager who 's technical merit is a nice-to-have.3 .
Every PHD I 've ever met has been pretentious , pompous , and non-pragmatic .
Their production always under-exceeded their peers .
Its really depressing , because I know there must be are a lot of really great PHD 's out there , but my personal experiences have been clouded in a small sample of pure mediocrity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its like bringing up cases of racism in a 'mostly' non-racist society.
You try not to think about hating group X, but there's just something about them that annoys you, and by not associating with group X I feel like I'm not discriminating against them.
In the end a question like this just makes you feel dirtier.The OP did a very bad job in framing their question, but the question holds merit.
"Is a graduate from a 4-year university any more likely to succeed in your company than a 2-year collage/trade/poly-tech/overthephone/overtheinternet graduate?
" Just as important as the original question, we have to realize that we all have built-in discrimination in one form or another against anyone who took a different path than yourself.From my personal bias, I get agitated that incompetent nitwits with university degrees get hired above my pay grade because I only worked my ass off learning 8 courses / semester for 2 years at a poly-tech instead of most universities which suggest 4-5?
courses per semester for 4 years at a typical university.
I respect smart, performance oriented people who benefit everyone they work with that have a can-do and hopefully pragmatic approach to their daily work.
That person could come from collage, university, or be completely uneducated and I'd appreciate them all the same.Other annoyances (possibly off-topic):1.
Pretty much all IT/Programming job applications specify "Bachelors or higher" in their job postings.
Most of the time when they realize you've been working in the industry for 10 years they could care less about where you went to school.
As a senior development job, they should more be asking, "So what have you done with yourself since graduating?".
Even if the term is thrown in everywhere, it still hurts to be deselected before even applying.2.
Our company seems to promote the least capable programmers to become technical managers.
Because we've basically stopped hiring junior developers (note to everyone, this is a big fat warning sign that your company is heading into stagnation) the number of actual promotions that occur in the company are very very few.
The few people that have made the step up have been by and large the worst coders we've ever had (as full times, contractors on the other hand...).
This tells me that they've either got the best soft-skills in the world, or someone's giving them the step up because they're too embarrassed or frightened to lay them off.
Now mind you, all of the promotions I'm talking about are very technical oriented jobs that require expertise to make sane judgments, not line manager who's technical merit is a nice-to-have.3.
Every PHD I've ever met has been pretentious, pompous, and non-pragmatic.
Their production always under-exceeded their peers.
Its really depressing, because I know there must be are a lot of really great PHD's out there, but my personal experiences have been clouded in a small sample of pure mediocrity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113034</id>
	<title>Me going back to school</title>
	<author>br00tus</author>
	<datestamp>1258363740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got a Commodore 64 around 1983, and got a modem soon after.  I learned BASIC on it.  In 1989, a friend of mine had a dial-in account on a local university's Unix and I began calling that.  I always had Unix access since then.  I began a job as a Unix Systems Administrator in 1996, at which time I began learning some Perl, and later, some PHP.  In 2000, I had a lot of free time and sat down and shored up my C knowledge more than I had already.</p><p>In 2006, I went back for my CS degree.  I have learned a lot that I had not learned in the proceeding 23 years.  I learned C++.  Despite all my experience, I had no idea what a constructor was before taking a C++ class.  I learned Java, to where I have sent implemented patches to some major free software Java programs.  I learned assembly language and programmed in it.  I learned computer internals, DeMorgan's Law and how to create a two's complement binary calculator with AND, OR and NOT gates.  I learned about big-O notation.  One of my teacher's is an old-timer, and he really showed us how recursion and back-tracking could be used on a whole host of programs - it was really impressive how powerful these tools can be on a whole host of problems.</p><p>I have interviewed people, and have been interviewed, dozens, maybe hundreds of times.  The world is full of programmers and administrators who know the basics of how to code, and only learn minimally when they have the job.  Once in a while you meet people who really want to understand everything and almost seem to actually understand everything about what we're doing.  Amidst a whole bunch of interviewees they really stand out - if they are somewhat normal and seem like they'd do the work, they're almost a guaranteed hire.</p><p>Also, on the other hand, do you want to look at yourself as a wage slave who knows the minimum to get by, or a craftsman who understands his work, even if he happens to be a wage slave?  You can get caught in a trap of thinking that spending time learning is only benefiting your boss, but really your bosses will win either way, if you just consider yourself a cog in the machine, they've won in another way.  People should take pride in their craftsmanship, even if the management doesn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got a Commodore 64 around 1983 , and got a modem soon after .
I learned BASIC on it .
In 1989 , a friend of mine had a dial-in account on a local university 's Unix and I began calling that .
I always had Unix access since then .
I began a job as a Unix Systems Administrator in 1996 , at which time I began learning some Perl , and later , some PHP .
In 2000 , I had a lot of free time and sat down and shored up my C knowledge more than I had already.In 2006 , I went back for my CS degree .
I have learned a lot that I had not learned in the proceeding 23 years .
I learned C + + .
Despite all my experience , I had no idea what a constructor was before taking a C + + class .
I learned Java , to where I have sent implemented patches to some major free software Java programs .
I learned assembly language and programmed in it .
I learned computer internals , DeMorgan 's Law and how to create a two 's complement binary calculator with AND , OR and NOT gates .
I learned about big-O notation .
One of my teacher 's is an old-timer , and he really showed us how recursion and back-tracking could be used on a whole host of programs - it was really impressive how powerful these tools can be on a whole host of problems.I have interviewed people , and have been interviewed , dozens , maybe hundreds of times .
The world is full of programmers and administrators who know the basics of how to code , and only learn minimally when they have the job .
Once in a while you meet people who really want to understand everything and almost seem to actually understand everything about what we 're doing .
Amidst a whole bunch of interviewees they really stand out - if they are somewhat normal and seem like they 'd do the work , they 're almost a guaranteed hire.Also , on the other hand , do you want to look at yourself as a wage slave who knows the minimum to get by , or a craftsman who understands his work , even if he happens to be a wage slave ?
You can get caught in a trap of thinking that spending time learning is only benefiting your boss , but really your bosses will win either way , if you just consider yourself a cog in the machine , they 've won in another way .
People should take pride in their craftsmanship , even if the management does n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got a Commodore 64 around 1983, and got a modem soon after.
I learned BASIC on it.
In 1989, a friend of mine had a dial-in account on a local university's Unix and I began calling that.
I always had Unix access since then.
I began a job as a Unix Systems Administrator in 1996, at which time I began learning some Perl, and later, some PHP.
In 2000, I had a lot of free time and sat down and shored up my C knowledge more than I had already.In 2006, I went back for my CS degree.
I have learned a lot that I had not learned in the proceeding 23 years.
I learned C++.
Despite all my experience, I had no idea what a constructor was before taking a C++ class.
I learned Java, to where I have sent implemented patches to some major free software Java programs.
I learned assembly language and programmed in it.
I learned computer internals, DeMorgan's Law and how to create a two's complement binary calculator with AND, OR and NOT gates.
I learned about big-O notation.
One of my teacher's is an old-timer, and he really showed us how recursion and back-tracking could be used on a whole host of programs - it was really impressive how powerful these tools can be on a whole host of problems.I have interviewed people, and have been interviewed, dozens, maybe hundreds of times.
The world is full of programmers and administrators who know the basics of how to code, and only learn minimally when they have the job.
Once in a while you meet people who really want to understand everything and almost seem to actually understand everything about what we're doing.
Amidst a whole bunch of interviewees they really stand out - if they are somewhat normal and seem like they'd do the work, they're almost a guaranteed hire.Also, on the other hand, do you want to look at yourself as a wage slave who knows the minimum to get by, or a craftsman who understands his work, even if he happens to be a wage slave?
You can get caught in a trap of thinking that spending time learning is only benefiting your boss, but really your bosses will win either way, if you just consider yourself a cog in the machine, they've won in another way.
People should take pride in their craftsmanship, even if the management doesn't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107326</id>
	<title>you get theory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258313940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a CS major at gatech and I have to disagree with you. Most of the experience you get at university is not vocational skill--what you get is foundational theory. I'll definitely never have a chance in the commercial sector to create a computer from the transistor level up, and I probably won't have any professional opportunities to write in assembly, lisp or smalltalk--let alone work on nontrivial group projects in those languages.</p><p>Sure you can do those things in your spare time, but why not do it in a guided fashion, and get a piece of paper that proves it?</p><p>Not to mention, there are plenty of algorithms and paradigms that I simply would not have come up with on my own/with the internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a CS major at gatech and I have to disagree with you .
Most of the experience you get at university is not vocational skill--what you get is foundational theory .
I 'll definitely never have a chance in the commercial sector to create a computer from the transistor level up , and I probably wo n't have any professional opportunities to write in assembly , lisp or smalltalk--let alone work on nontrivial group projects in those languages.Sure you can do those things in your spare time , but why not do it in a guided fashion , and get a piece of paper that proves it ? Not to mention , there are plenty of algorithms and paradigms that I simply would not have come up with on my own/with the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a CS major at gatech and I have to disagree with you.
Most of the experience you get at university is not vocational skill--what you get is foundational theory.
I'll definitely never have a chance in the commercial sector to create a computer from the transistor level up, and I probably won't have any professional opportunities to write in assembly, lisp or smalltalk--let alone work on nontrivial group projects in those languages.Sure you can do those things in your spare time, but why not do it in a guided fashion, and get a piece of paper that proves it?Not to mention, there are plenty of algorithms and paradigms that I simply would not have come up with on my own/with the internet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30120740</id>
	<title>Programming != CompSci</title>
	<author>sirwired</author>
	<datestamp>1258362960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, the vast majority of code in this world consists of relatively straightforward (if tedious to write) database applications.  A CompSci degree is most certainly overkill for the lion's share of this code.  (Note: This is the most common kind of programming that gets outsourced, which might be why the OP is having trouble finding a job doing it.)</p><p>However, for hairier apps, or more abstract things, the well-rounded background provided by a CompSci degree is valuable.  A CompSci degree will include a broader range of technical courses, along with courses in business, economics, and "teach you how to think" classes like history, calculus, physics, etc.</p><p>As a side note, Slashdot should have commented on or re-worded the question, which was most obviously written by somebody who is pissed about a lack of job opportunities for his/her degree-less self.</p><p>Personally, I have yet to directly use my degree in Computer Engineering at all.  In ten years, I haven't written a line of code, haven't assembled a single circuit, much less done any calculus or physics.  But in my department, it is easy to tell who has gone to college and who hasn't, by means of how long it takes them to absorb entirely new topics, approaches to problem solving, etc.</p><p>It most certainly is possible for a 2-yr grad (or even somebody with no formal training at all) to produce great code, and it is possible for a PhD to produce code awful beyond belief.  But all else being equal, if I was hiring, I'll take the college grad any day of the week.</p><p>SirWired</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , the vast majority of code in this world consists of relatively straightforward ( if tedious to write ) database applications .
A CompSci degree is most certainly overkill for the lion 's share of this code .
( Note : This is the most common kind of programming that gets outsourced , which might be why the OP is having trouble finding a job doing it .
) However , for hairier apps , or more abstract things , the well-rounded background provided by a CompSci degree is valuable .
A CompSci degree will include a broader range of technical courses , along with courses in business , economics , and " teach you how to think " classes like history , calculus , physics , etc.As a side note , Slashdot should have commented on or re-worded the question , which was most obviously written by somebody who is pissed about a lack of job opportunities for his/her degree-less self.Personally , I have yet to directly use my degree in Computer Engineering at all .
In ten years , I have n't written a line of code , have n't assembled a single circuit , much less done any calculus or physics .
But in my department , it is easy to tell who has gone to college and who has n't , by means of how long it takes them to absorb entirely new topics , approaches to problem solving , etc.It most certainly is possible for a 2-yr grad ( or even somebody with no formal training at all ) to produce great code , and it is possible for a PhD to produce code awful beyond belief .
But all else being equal , if I was hiring , I 'll take the college grad any day of the week.SirWired</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, the vast majority of code in this world consists of relatively straightforward (if tedious to write) database applications.
A CompSci degree is most certainly overkill for the lion's share of this code.
(Note: This is the most common kind of programming that gets outsourced, which might be why the OP is having trouble finding a job doing it.
)However, for hairier apps, or more abstract things, the well-rounded background provided by a CompSci degree is valuable.
A CompSci degree will include a broader range of technical courses, along with courses in business, economics, and "teach you how to think" classes like history, calculus, physics, etc.As a side note, Slashdot should have commented on or re-worded the question, which was most obviously written by somebody who is pissed about a lack of job opportunities for his/her degree-less self.Personally, I have yet to directly use my degree in Computer Engineering at all.
In ten years, I haven't written a line of code, haven't assembled a single circuit, much less done any calculus or physics.
But in my department, it is easy to tell who has gone to college and who hasn't, by means of how long it takes them to absorb entirely new topics, approaches to problem solving, etc.It most certainly is possible for a 2-yr grad (or even somebody with no formal training at all) to produce great code, and it is possible for a PhD to produce code awful beyond belief.
But all else being equal, if I was hiring, I'll take the college grad any day of the week.SirWired</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107476</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With all due respect...</p><p>People try to use degrees as a way to sort intelligence versus lack thereof.  All else equal, I'll say with confidence that higher degrees are correlated with higher intelligence.</p><p>Of course, I've had *many* better educated developers tell me I'm prematurely optimizing when I've asked language specific questions before--failing to understand that I know my application, and understand that a particular function call is going to be executed a 5e6-1e7 times in a loop for every webpage being loaded in our application.</p><p>Bottom line is--some people don't get it.  All else being equal, I want to work with GOOD experienced programmers.  It's not class warfare if I tailor my interview process to try to find a qualified, skilled applicant in a minimal amount of time--instead of trying to find THE most qualified applicant.</p><p>I have finite time in a work day--I go home after 7-12 hours.  If I spend half my day in managerial overhead, and 8 hours a week in interviews--I don't WANT to wait 12 months to find a programmer good enough to work in our application.  If tailoring my search to people with 4 year degrees appears to improve the odds, I'll do that.  People without them are welcome to submit a resume--but without good experience to back it, are going to be tossed into the trash bin.</p><p>I've had PhDs come in for an interview who claimed they'd used SQL for ten years that couldn't write a select statement when asked--and a professor of EE at the local university apply for a part time position who couldn't correctly write a hello world in C.  They were shown to the door politely.</p><p>And yes--my average programmer does need to understand algorithms, O(N) and a lot of other things.  I've started using bits of chaos theory in my application (and REALLY wish my background was strong enough to thoroughly understand what I was implementing).  Again--it comes to wanting intelligent people.  And with time so scarce, I'll do anything legal to try to filter my applicants down to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...intelligent ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With all due respect...People try to use degrees as a way to sort intelligence versus lack thereof .
All else equal , I 'll say with confidence that higher degrees are correlated with higher intelligence.Of course , I 've had * many * better educated developers tell me I 'm prematurely optimizing when I 've asked language specific questions before--failing to understand that I know my application , and understand that a particular function call is going to be executed a 5e6-1e7 times in a loop for every webpage being loaded in our application.Bottom line is--some people do n't get it .
All else being equal , I want to work with GOOD experienced programmers .
It 's not class warfare if I tailor my interview process to try to find a qualified , skilled applicant in a minimal amount of time--instead of trying to find THE most qualified applicant.I have finite time in a work day--I go home after 7-12 hours .
If I spend half my day in managerial overhead , and 8 hours a week in interviews--I do n't WANT to wait 12 months to find a programmer good enough to work in our application .
If tailoring my search to people with 4 year degrees appears to improve the odds , I 'll do that .
People without them are welcome to submit a resume--but without good experience to back it , are going to be tossed into the trash bin.I 've had PhDs come in for an interview who claimed they 'd used SQL for ten years that could n't write a select statement when asked--and a professor of EE at the local university apply for a part time position who could n't correctly write a hello world in C. They were shown to the door politely.And yes--my average programmer does need to understand algorithms , O ( N ) and a lot of other things .
I 've started using bits of chaos theory in my application ( and REALLY wish my background was strong enough to thoroughly understand what I was implementing ) .
Again--it comes to wanting intelligent people .
And with time so scarce , I 'll do anything legal to try to filter my applicants down to ...intelligent ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With all due respect...People try to use degrees as a way to sort intelligence versus lack thereof.
All else equal, I'll say with confidence that higher degrees are correlated with higher intelligence.Of course, I've had *many* better educated developers tell me I'm prematurely optimizing when I've asked language specific questions before--failing to understand that I know my application, and understand that a particular function call is going to be executed a 5e6-1e7 times in a loop for every webpage being loaded in our application.Bottom line is--some people don't get it.
All else being equal, I want to work with GOOD experienced programmers.
It's not class warfare if I tailor my interview process to try to find a qualified, skilled applicant in a minimal amount of time--instead of trying to find THE most qualified applicant.I have finite time in a work day--I go home after 7-12 hours.
If I spend half my day in managerial overhead, and 8 hours a week in interviews--I don't WANT to wait 12 months to find a programmer good enough to work in our application.
If tailoring my search to people with 4 year degrees appears to improve the odds, I'll do that.
People without them are welcome to submit a resume--but without good experience to back it, are going to be tossed into the trash bin.I've had PhDs come in for an interview who claimed they'd used SQL for ten years that couldn't write a select statement when asked--and a professor of EE at the local university apply for a part time position who couldn't correctly write a hello world in C.  They were shown to the door politely.And yes--my average programmer does need to understand algorithms, O(N) and a lot of other things.
I've started using bits of chaos theory in my application (and REALLY wish my background was strong enough to thoroughly understand what I was implementing).
Again--it comes to wanting intelligent people.
And with time so scarce, I'll do anything legal to try to filter my applicants down to ...intelligent ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112490</id>
	<title>College degree evidence of commitment</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1258313160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The college graduate may also have better communication skills and an improved ability to create reports.</p><p>There are a lot of bright people out there with 4 year degrees, 2 year degrees, and even no degree period.</p><p>But do you want to risk a large amount of money on someone that might flame out on you?<br>Businesses feel more comfortable putting a big budget on someone who showed they can complete a long term commitment to getting a degree under all the various stresses that most likely occurred during the 4 to 6 years it took them to get the degree (illnesses, dating problems, unfair professors, learning large amounts of material within six weeks, etc.).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The college graduate may also have better communication skills and an improved ability to create reports.There are a lot of bright people out there with 4 year degrees , 2 year degrees , and even no degree period.But do you want to risk a large amount of money on someone that might flame out on you ? Businesses feel more comfortable putting a big budget on someone who showed they can complete a long term commitment to getting a degree under all the various stresses that most likely occurred during the 4 to 6 years it took them to get the degree ( illnesses , dating problems , unfair professors , learning large amounts of material within six weeks , etc .
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The college graduate may also have better communication skills and an improved ability to create reports.There are a lot of bright people out there with 4 year degrees, 2 year degrees, and even no degree period.But do you want to risk a large amount of money on someone that might flame out on you?Businesses feel more comfortable putting a big budget on someone who showed they can complete a long term commitment to getting a degree under all the various stresses that most likely occurred during the 4 to 6 years it took them to get the degree (illnesses, dating problems, unfair professors, learning large amounts of material within six weeks, etc.
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186</id>
	<title>What? You can't be both?</title>
	<author>l0ungeb0y</author>
	<datestamp>1258318620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't even bother with vocational school much less university. I learned programming for $100 in books from Borders.<br>Within 3 months, I was pulling in $75k a year and now I make a salary that's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractor, which is better than a lot of "white collar" people make. I have considered leaving development and going into management, such as taking a Director position, which I have been offered a few times. But, I'm not sure I'd be happy in management, so I've yet to act on that notion. And even as a Director, I doubt I'd be able to make much more than $150k a year, which is about the max I could get as an FT coder at most software houses. Which is why I contract... the money is so much better if like me, you are good at keeping the work flowing.</p><p>Anyway, it all comes down to what YOU can get someone to pay you.<br>If you let your level of education dictate the level of salary you make, you just aren't very good at playing the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't even bother with vocational school much less university .
I learned programming for $ 100 in books from Borders.Within 3 months , I was pulling in $ 75k a year and now I make a salary that 's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractor , which is better than a lot of " white collar " people make .
I have considered leaving development and going into management , such as taking a Director position , which I have been offered a few times .
But , I 'm not sure I 'd be happy in management , so I 've yet to act on that notion .
And even as a Director , I doubt I 'd be able to make much more than $ 150k a year , which is about the max I could get as an FT coder at most software houses .
Which is why I contract... the money is so much better if like me , you are good at keeping the work flowing.Anyway , it all comes down to what YOU can get someone to pay you.If you let your level of education dictate the level of salary you make , you just are n't very good at playing the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't even bother with vocational school much less university.
I learned programming for $100 in books from Borders.Within 3 months, I was pulling in $75k a year and now I make a salary that's pushing on a third of a million a year as a contractor, which is better than a lot of "white collar" people make.
I have considered leaving development and going into management, such as taking a Director position, which I have been offered a few times.
But, I'm not sure I'd be happy in management, so I've yet to act on that notion.
And even as a Director, I doubt I'd be able to make much more than $150k a year, which is about the max I could get as an FT coder at most software houses.
Which is why I contract... the money is so much better if like me, you are good at keeping the work flowing.Anyway, it all comes down to what YOU can get someone to pay you.If you let your level of education dictate the level of salary you make, you just aren't very good at playing the game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114990</id>
	<title>0\% Paper on the wall.. 100\% programmer</title>
	<author>AxDx</author>
	<datestamp>1258385700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call me lucky, but I have no paper on the wall.. just lots of experience (and more importantly I have found), a great reputation for quality...  both of which you cannot gain in 4 years of college/vocational school.

I think that the big fallacy when attempting to discuss these kinds of problems is being caught up in the "market" in one's
specific geographic area.  What is true with the "Big Cities", is not true for the rest of the world.  In fact, areas like the one I live in, have a vacuum of talent.  People need coding done and will pay regardless of what's on your wall.  It comes down to "Can you do It?","How long will it take?" and "How much will it cost?".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call me lucky , but I have no paper on the wall.. just lots of experience ( and more importantly I have found ) , a great reputation for quality... both of which you can not gain in 4 years of college/vocational school .
I think that the big fallacy when attempting to discuss these kinds of problems is being caught up in the " market " in one 's specific geographic area .
What is true with the " Big Cities " , is not true for the rest of the world .
In fact , areas like the one I live in , have a vacuum of talent .
People need coding done and will pay regardless of what 's on your wall .
It comes down to " Can you do It ?
" , " How long will it take ?
" and " How much will it cost ?
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call me lucky, but I have no paper on the wall.. just lots of experience (and more importantly I have found), a great reputation for quality...  both of which you cannot gain in 4 years of college/vocational school.
I think that the big fallacy when attempting to discuss these kinds of problems is being caught up in the "market" in one's
specific geographic area.
What is true with the "Big Cities", is not true for the rest of the world.
In fact, areas like the one I live in, have a vacuum of talent.
People need coding done and will pay regardless of what's on your wall.
It comes down to "Can you do It?
","How long will it take?
" and "How much will it cost?
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110224</id>
	<title>are we talking entry level or with 20 years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258289520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, if you're hiring someone into a first or second job, there would probably be a difference (on the average) between the 4 year CS grad from a good school vs 4 year any degree vs took programming in high school.  So it's a valid selection criterion for HR (although one would like to see some sort of equivalence like they have for the experience requirements for professional engineer licenses.. 4 years of an ABET school = 2 years professional experience or some such)</p><p>But should that distinction be built into the system after, say, 10 or 15 years experience (because it does exist.. payscales differ as does the exempt/non-exempt distinction).  After that span of time and experience, one can have folks with 1 year of experience 15 times (degreed or not) and folks with 15 years of high quality experience.</p><p>I'd venture that after 10 or 15 years, a non-degreed candidate could have easily picked up the "breadth requirement" sorts of knowledge embodied in the classic 4 year liberal arts education: politics of the workplace; english composition; etc.  Or not. One would have to interview the person to know for sure.  Likewise, there are degreed candidates with 15 years experience who dragged through those breadth requirements and promptly forgot them and have spent the last 10 years head-down coding in whatever language you care to name.</p><p>And, once you get past the "top school" thing (evaluated by whatever means: USNWRs method, how many entering freshman took AP tests, percentage of applications rejected, entering freshman SAT scores, etc.) how much difference is there, really, in technical skills between the *average* BSCS grad from UCLA or Cal Poly Pomona?  And is that difference bigger or smaller than the standard deviation of those graduates from one school. if the difference between schools is 0.1 SD of the overall population, then it's not that important, eh?</p><p>In "fashionable" industries where "who you know" is important (entertainment, wall street law firms, etc.) where you went to school has a big effect, but if you're grinding out algorithms to update home loans in a database, or designing control algorithms in an engine controller for an automaker, I suspect that's not such a big deal (unless the hiring supervisor thinks that all grads of XYZ uni walk on water, because he/she went there and had a good experience).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , if you 're hiring someone into a first or second job , there would probably be a difference ( on the average ) between the 4 year CS grad from a good school vs 4 year any degree vs took programming in high school .
So it 's a valid selection criterion for HR ( although one would like to see some sort of equivalence like they have for the experience requirements for professional engineer licenses.. 4 years of an ABET school = 2 years professional experience or some such ) But should that distinction be built into the system after , say , 10 or 15 years experience ( because it does exist.. payscales differ as does the exempt/non-exempt distinction ) .
After that span of time and experience , one can have folks with 1 year of experience 15 times ( degreed or not ) and folks with 15 years of high quality experience.I 'd venture that after 10 or 15 years , a non-degreed candidate could have easily picked up the " breadth requirement " sorts of knowledge embodied in the classic 4 year liberal arts education : politics of the workplace ; english composition ; etc .
Or not .
One would have to interview the person to know for sure .
Likewise , there are degreed candidates with 15 years experience who dragged through those breadth requirements and promptly forgot them and have spent the last 10 years head-down coding in whatever language you care to name.And , once you get past the " top school " thing ( evaluated by whatever means : USNWRs method , how many entering freshman took AP tests , percentage of applications rejected , entering freshman SAT scores , etc .
) how much difference is there , really , in technical skills between the * average * BSCS grad from UCLA or Cal Poly Pomona ?
And is that difference bigger or smaller than the standard deviation of those graduates from one school .
if the difference between schools is 0.1 SD of the overall population , then it 's not that important , eh ? In " fashionable " industries where " who you know " is important ( entertainment , wall street law firms , etc .
) where you went to school has a big effect , but if you 're grinding out algorithms to update home loans in a database , or designing control algorithms in an engine controller for an automaker , I suspect that 's not such a big deal ( unless the hiring supervisor thinks that all grads of XYZ uni walk on water , because he/she went there and had a good experience ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, if you're hiring someone into a first or second job, there would probably be a difference (on the average) between the 4 year CS grad from a good school vs 4 year any degree vs took programming in high school.
So it's a valid selection criterion for HR (although one would like to see some sort of equivalence like they have for the experience requirements for professional engineer licenses.. 4 years of an ABET school = 2 years professional experience or some such)But should that distinction be built into the system after, say, 10 or 15 years experience (because it does exist.. payscales differ as does the exempt/non-exempt distinction).
After that span of time and experience, one can have folks with 1 year of experience 15 times (degreed or not) and folks with 15 years of high quality experience.I'd venture that after 10 or 15 years, a non-degreed candidate could have easily picked up the "breadth requirement" sorts of knowledge embodied in the classic 4 year liberal arts education: politics of the workplace; english composition; etc.
Or not.
One would have to interview the person to know for sure.
Likewise, there are degreed candidates with 15 years experience who dragged through those breadth requirements and promptly forgot them and have spent the last 10 years head-down coding in whatever language you care to name.And, once you get past the "top school" thing (evaluated by whatever means: USNWRs method, how many entering freshman took AP tests, percentage of applications rejected, entering freshman SAT scores, etc.
) how much difference is there, really, in technical skills between the *average* BSCS grad from UCLA or Cal Poly Pomona?
And is that difference bigger or smaller than the standard deviation of those graduates from one school.
if the difference between schools is 0.1 SD of the overall population, then it's not that important, eh?In "fashionable" industries where "who you know" is important (entertainment, wall street law firms, etc.
) where you went to school has a big effect, but if you're grinding out algorithms to update home loans in a database, or designing control algorithms in an engine controller for an automaker, I suspect that's not such a big deal (unless the hiring supervisor thinks that all grads of XYZ uni walk on water, because he/she went there and had a good experience).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113044</id>
	<title>Coder vs. Computer Scientist</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1258363860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that is your question. And honestly you cannot compare these two. Yes a good computer scientist shall be able to program. He or she might even be a very skilled programmer. But to develop good software you do not need mainly good coders (well they will help) you need a good application design. You also need someone who is good at requirement engineering. No successful big software project nowadays is just coded. They are planned and designed and then implemented. And we use DSLs and generators and other stuff to create the final structure of the software.</p><p>So to make it short I use an analogy to build a house, you need an architect, someone who knows what the house is for, and you need people who build it. And therefore coders are for coding and software architects are for planning and designing.</p><p>And BTW some theoretical knowledge helps you to improve your coding techniques, because its not only knowledge on a programming language which is required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that is your question .
And honestly you can not compare these two .
Yes a good computer scientist shall be able to program .
He or she might even be a very skilled programmer .
But to develop good software you do not need mainly good coders ( well they will help ) you need a good application design .
You also need someone who is good at requirement engineering .
No successful big software project nowadays is just coded .
They are planned and designed and then implemented .
And we use DSLs and generators and other stuff to create the final structure of the software.So to make it short I use an analogy to build a house , you need an architect , someone who knows what the house is for , and you need people who build it .
And therefore coders are for coding and software architects are for planning and designing.And BTW some theoretical knowledge helps you to improve your coding techniques , because its not only knowledge on a programming language which is required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that is your question.
And honestly you cannot compare these two.
Yes a good computer scientist shall be able to program.
He or she might even be a very skilled programmer.
But to develop good software you do not need mainly good coders (well they will help) you need a good application design.
You also need someone who is good at requirement engineering.
No successful big software project nowadays is just coded.
They are planned and designed and then implemented.
And we use DSLs and generators and other stuff to create the final structure of the software.So to make it short I use an analogy to build a house, you need an architect, someone who knows what the house is for, and you need people who build it.
And therefore coders are for coding and software architects are for planning and designing.And BTW some theoretical knowledge helps you to improve your coding techniques, because its not only knowledge on a programming language which is required.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108264</id>
	<title>Re:Degree, or four years of experience?</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1258275840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It also depends on what you're looking for. If you're looking for someone you can set loose unsupervised on vital code right away, then yes, you want to see their code. You don't care about paper qualifications.</p><p>Whereas if you're looking for someone to mentor and train up, a graduate is a great starting point.</p><p>A CS graduate fresh from college has been exposed to a LOT of concepts, but will only be beginning their journey in writing "real world" code.</p><p>Example: one of the subjects I enjoyed most at university was functional programming (we used Miranda - this was 1994). A 'blue collar' programmer would never have been exposed to this, and once I got into my particular version of the 'real world' (a C and Shell shop, to which I later introduced Perl) there was no scope to indulge in functional languages. Yet, functional concepts informed my coding style to the extent that the language allowed it.</p><p>But now functional programming is drifting into the mainstream. People are using Javascript's functional features; one of the attractions of languages like Ruby and Groovy is the use of closures; Haskell and Erlang are pure functional languages that look to be taking off for certain problem spaces. And *because* of my degree, I'm well placed to understand these things. That's just an example.</p><p>There's all sorts of other stuff that goes on in a CS degree that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/indirectly/ affect your ability to develop as a coder. I've never formally used SSADM or Jackson Structured Programming. But both have definitely informed my design decisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also depends on what you 're looking for .
If you 're looking for someone you can set loose unsupervised on vital code right away , then yes , you want to see their code .
You do n't care about paper qualifications.Whereas if you 're looking for someone to mentor and train up , a graduate is a great starting point.A CS graduate fresh from college has been exposed to a LOT of concepts , but will only be beginning their journey in writing " real world " code.Example : one of the subjects I enjoyed most at university was functional programming ( we used Miranda - this was 1994 ) .
A 'blue collar ' programmer would never have been exposed to this , and once I got into my particular version of the 'real world ' ( a C and Shell shop , to which I later introduced Perl ) there was no scope to indulge in functional languages .
Yet , functional concepts informed my coding style to the extent that the language allowed it.But now functional programming is drifting into the mainstream .
People are using Javascript 's functional features ; one of the attractions of languages like Ruby and Groovy is the use of closures ; Haskell and Erlang are pure functional languages that look to be taking off for certain problem spaces .
And * because * of my degree , I 'm well placed to understand these things .
That 's just an example.There 's all sorts of other stuff that goes on in a CS degree that /indirectly/ affect your ability to develop as a coder .
I 've never formally used SSADM or Jackson Structured Programming .
But both have definitely informed my design decisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also depends on what you're looking for.
If you're looking for someone you can set loose unsupervised on vital code right away, then yes, you want to see their code.
You don't care about paper qualifications.Whereas if you're looking for someone to mentor and train up, a graduate is a great starting point.A CS graduate fresh from college has been exposed to a LOT of concepts, but will only be beginning their journey in writing "real world" code.Example: one of the subjects I enjoyed most at university was functional programming (we used Miranda - this was 1994).
A 'blue collar' programmer would never have been exposed to this, and once I got into my particular version of the 'real world' (a C and Shell shop, to which I later introduced Perl) there was no scope to indulge in functional languages.
Yet, functional concepts informed my coding style to the extent that the language allowed it.But now functional programming is drifting into the mainstream.
People are using Javascript's functional features; one of the attractions of languages like Ruby and Groovy is the use of closures; Haskell and Erlang are pure functional languages that look to be taking off for certain problem spaces.
And *because* of my degree, I'm well placed to understand these things.
That's just an example.There's all sorts of other stuff that goes on in a CS degree that /indirectly/ affect your ability to develop as a coder.
I've never formally used SSADM or Jackson Structured Programming.
But both have definitely informed my design decisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107302</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30124966</id>
	<title>Yes it's true...</title>
	<author>Kazoo the Clown</author>
	<datestamp>1258384260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's an absolute fact that not having a 4-year degree will keep you out of some programming jobs.  But, it's quite likely that those jobs it will keep you out of, are ones you would want to be kept out of in any case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's an absolute fact that not having a 4-year degree will keep you out of some programming jobs .
But , it 's quite likely that those jobs it will keep you out of , are ones you would want to be kept out of in any case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's an absolute fact that not having a 4-year degree will keep you out of some programming jobs.
But, it's quite likely that those jobs it will keep you out of, are ones you would want to be kept out of in any case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30119794</id>
	<title>The correct approach to this debate is :</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1258402980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Fuck degrees - show me what you have done before"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Fuck degrees - show me what you have done before "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Fuck degrees - show me what you have done before"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116554</id>
	<title>Re:proofreading for the college graduate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258392660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mabey he wrote this while waiting in queue for Alterac Valley?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mabey he wrote this while waiting in queue for Alterac Valley ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mabey he wrote this while waiting in queue for Alterac Valley?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110310</id>
	<title>Re:Perseverance</title>
	<author>najay</author>
	<datestamp>1258290060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't mention that I am actually one of the free thinker types, and I DO have problems finishing tasks unless I really work at it. It took me 4 years to get my BS in Computer Science, mainly because I was able to stay pissed that long at the hypocrisy of not being able to get a job as an Engineer without a degree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't mention that I am actually one of the free thinker types , and I DO have problems finishing tasks unless I really work at it .
It took me 4 years to get my BS in Computer Science , mainly because I was able to stay pissed that long at the hypocrisy of not being able to get a job as an Engineer without a degree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't mention that I am actually one of the free thinker types, and I DO have problems finishing tasks unless I really work at it.
It took me 4 years to get my BS in Computer Science, mainly because I was able to stay pissed that long at the hypocrisy of not being able to get a job as an Engineer without a degree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108288</id>
	<title>outsource it</title>
	<author>zelik</author>
	<datestamp>1258275900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because with a 2 year vocational degree, your basing your worth based only on your vocational skills.  The unquantifiable benefits (your results may vary) of college include but are not limited to: a) collaboration with others b) social engagement c) research d) conflict resolution, etc.  Sure you get these skills in high school and you can get them anywhere else.  However, the fact that you got into a 4 year college (and I'm talking about any top 50 ranked colleges, pick your list) provides a somewhat coarse but useful aptitude assessment as to your abilities.  <br> <br>
I associate the difference between having your work done in the US or outsourcing it to India.  Sure, they have coders there and some are really damn good.  But somehow things just don't turn out the same/as well as something programmed by the people I hire here (and pay an arm and a leg for).  They can do the grunt work great but wow have you seen some of the interfaces or design logic they produce?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because with a 2 year vocational degree , your basing your worth based only on your vocational skills .
The unquantifiable benefits ( your results may vary ) of college include but are not limited to : a ) collaboration with others b ) social engagement c ) research d ) conflict resolution , etc .
Sure you get these skills in high school and you can get them anywhere else .
However , the fact that you got into a 4 year college ( and I 'm talking about any top 50 ranked colleges , pick your list ) provides a somewhat coarse but useful aptitude assessment as to your abilities .
I associate the difference between having your work done in the US or outsourcing it to India .
Sure , they have coders there and some are really damn good .
But somehow things just do n't turn out the same/as well as something programmed by the people I hire here ( and pay an arm and a leg for ) .
They can do the grunt work great but wow have you seen some of the interfaces or design logic they produce ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because with a 2 year vocational degree, your basing your worth based only on your vocational skills.
The unquantifiable benefits (your results may vary) of college include but are not limited to: a) collaboration with others b) social engagement c) research d) conflict resolution, etc.
Sure you get these skills in high school and you can get them anywhere else.
However, the fact that you got into a 4 year college (and I'm talking about any top 50 ranked colleges, pick your list) provides a somewhat coarse but useful aptitude assessment as to your abilities.
I associate the difference between having your work done in the US or outsourcing it to India.
Sure, they have coders there and some are really damn good.
But somehow things just don't turn out the same/as well as something programmed by the people I hire here (and pay an arm and a leg for).
They can do the grunt work great but wow have you seen some of the interfaces or design logic they produce?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108668</id>
	<title>Re:Why they make a difference?</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1258278240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Well, probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design. Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect,</i></p><p>This reminds of someone I knew in college.  This guy worked as a steel worker building buildings for 10 plus years.  He decided he wanted to become an architect so enrolled in college.  He used to say that if he ever designed something and had a worker say something could not be done, he'd try it himself and if he could do it he'd fire whoever said it could not be done.</p><p><i>If I could have both I'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it.</i></p><p>Why not do both?  When I was last in college I was going to a 2 year college, but I had to drop out.  I hope to start taking classes again, I have 3 classes I need to take to finish the degree.  I then want to work as well as transfer to a 4 year college.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design .
Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect,This reminds of someone I knew in college .
This guy worked as a steel worker building buildings for 10 plus years .
He decided he wanted to become an architect so enrolled in college .
He used to say that if he ever designed something and had a worker say something could not be done , he 'd try it himself and if he could do it he 'd fire whoever said it could not be done.If I could have both I 'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it.Why not do both ?
When I was last in college I was going to a 2 year college , but I had to drop out .
I hope to start taking classes again , I have 3 classes I need to take to finish the degree .
I then want to work as well as transfer to a 4 year college .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, probably because computer science is one of the few places where you really go from build to design.
Sure it happens that a construction worker becomes a civil engineer or architect,This reminds of someone I knew in college.
This guy worked as a steel worker building buildings for 10 plus years.
He decided he wanted to become an architect so enrolled in college.
He used to say that if he ever designed something and had a worker say something could not be done, he'd try it himself and if he could do it he'd fire whoever said it could not be done.If I could have both I'd probably ask the guy with the academic background to draft it and ask the other to sanity check it.Why not do both?
When I was last in college I was going to a 2 year college, but I had to drop out.
I hope to start taking classes again, I have 3 classes I need to take to finish the degree.
I then want to work as well as transfer to a 4 year college.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107322</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117334</id>
	<title>Look here is the deal.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258395660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you walk in to your interview all sharp and clean and you have your shiny New BA degree and your are 40k+ in dept and you are getting teary eyed getting ready to beg the HR and your new boss to hire you THAT is when you get the job.  Remember there is no one that is better for the job then someone that is so far in dept he or she is willing to do anything to get hired.  Welcome to America!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you walk in to your interview all sharp and clean and you have your shiny New BA degree and your are 40k + in dept and you are getting teary eyed getting ready to beg the HR and your new boss to hire you THAT is when you get the job .
Remember there is no one that is better for the job then someone that is so far in dept he or she is willing to do anything to get hired .
Welcome to America !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you walk in to your interview all sharp and clean and you have your shiny New BA degree and your are 40k+ in dept and you are getting teary eyed getting ready to beg the HR and your new boss to hire you THAT is when you get the job.
Remember there is no one that is better for the job then someone that is so far in dept he or she is willing to do anything to get hired.
Welcome to America!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108362</id>
	<title>Both degrees come with an expiration date...</title>
	<author>cherokee158</author>
	<datestamp>1258276380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking from the perspective of someone who lacks either a two or four year degree in programming, but has spent most of my life learning another trade entirely, I don't see how either degree would be all that impressive, given that your programming skills, much like their byproducts, seem to have an expiration date stamped on them.</p><p>Don't you guys get tired of relearning everything every five years? I know I do, and I never had to worry about it until all my tools were replaced by software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking from the perspective of someone who lacks either a two or four year degree in programming , but has spent most of my life learning another trade entirely , I do n't see how either degree would be all that impressive , given that your programming skills , much like their byproducts , seem to have an expiration date stamped on them.Do n't you guys get tired of relearning everything every five years ?
I know I do , and I never had to worry about it until all my tools were replaced by software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking from the perspective of someone who lacks either a two or four year degree in programming, but has spent most of my life learning another trade entirely, I don't see how either degree would be all that impressive, given that your programming skills, much like their byproducts, seem to have an expiration date stamped on them.Don't you guys get tired of relearning everything every five years?
I know I do, and I never had to worry about it until all my tools were replaced by software.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109036</id>
	<title>Coding is an art</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258280640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coding is an art, and talent is fairly random.<br>However, someone who has gone to university would be expected to have a broader base of experiences from which to pull inspiration. Linguistic or philosophical knowlege might trigger a new connection that results in a more elegant solution.<br>Additionally, academic training teaches you not only where to find information, but to know whether something is already known or not. Without an academic grounding you are more likely to try reinventing the wheel, or worse, give up when a problem has already been solved elsewhere.<br>Additionally, people with broader skills and intelligence are more likely to go to college in the first place. So it might not be that college causes success, but that it's correlated with it: people with the attributes needed for success are more likely also to have been accepted to and completed college.<br>From an employer's point of view, college provides two important 'known' attributes about a potential hire: that they have a baseline understanding of the subject, and that they have the ability to finish what they started. Because the risk is lower, they can afford to pay more.<br>No matter how clever or talented you are, it is going to make it easier to market yourself if you have that piece of paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coding is an art , and talent is fairly random.However , someone who has gone to university would be expected to have a broader base of experiences from which to pull inspiration .
Linguistic or philosophical knowlege might trigger a new connection that results in a more elegant solution.Additionally , academic training teaches you not only where to find information , but to know whether something is already known or not .
Without an academic grounding you are more likely to try reinventing the wheel , or worse , give up when a problem has already been solved elsewhere.Additionally , people with broader skills and intelligence are more likely to go to college in the first place .
So it might not be that college causes success , but that it 's correlated with it : people with the attributes needed for success are more likely also to have been accepted to and completed college.From an employer 's point of view , college provides two important 'known ' attributes about a potential hire : that they have a baseline understanding of the subject , and that they have the ability to finish what they started .
Because the risk is lower , they can afford to pay more.No matter how clever or talented you are , it is going to make it easier to market yourself if you have that piece of paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coding is an art, and talent is fairly random.However, someone who has gone to university would be expected to have a broader base of experiences from which to pull inspiration.
Linguistic or philosophical knowlege might trigger a new connection that results in a more elegant solution.Additionally, academic training teaches you not only where to find information, but to know whether something is already known or not.
Without an academic grounding you are more likely to try reinventing the wheel, or worse, give up when a problem has already been solved elsewhere.Additionally, people with broader skills and intelligence are more likely to go to college in the first place.
So it might not be that college causes success, but that it's correlated with it: people with the attributes needed for success are more likely also to have been accepted to and completed college.From an employer's point of view, college provides two important 'known' attributes about a potential hire: that they have a baseline understanding of the subject, and that they have the ability to finish what they started.
Because the risk is lower, they can afford to pay more.No matter how clever or talented you are, it is going to make it easier to market yourself if you have that piece of paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107414</id>
	<title>School?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best coders I know didn't go to college, at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best coders I know did n't go to college , at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best coders I know didn't go to college, at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107652</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1258315920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms.</i></p><p>Google is your friend.</p><p>Of course, the <i>really</i> good programmers can invent a novel solution to the problem at hand that beats the textbook approach.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The really good " untrained " programmers know where to look for the algorithms.Google is your friend.Of course , the really good programmers can invent a novel solution to the problem at hand that beats the textbook approach.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really good "untrained" programmers know where to look for the algorithms.Google is your friend.Of course, the really good programmers can invent a novel solution to the problem at hand that beats the textbook approach.-jcr</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30120784</id>
	<title>re: huiring blue collar developers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258363200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they have HR departments that need to answer to legal departments, that's why. The more objective criteria they use in hiring decisions, the more they'll be able to:<br>1) stave off hiring/firing related lawsuits.. you didn't hire me but you hired him and I have a four year degree and he doesn't...<br>2) attract investors who need the hand holding of knowing that they only hire "the best".<br>3) create an artificially tight market (we can't find qualified candidates, Congressman X, so please let us import more H1Bs.</p><p>mostly 3</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they have HR departments that need to answer to legal departments , that 's why .
The more objective criteria they use in hiring decisions , the more they 'll be able to : 1 ) stave off hiring/firing related lawsuits.. you did n't hire me but you hired him and I have a four year degree and he does n't...2 ) attract investors who need the hand holding of knowing that they only hire " the best " .3 ) create an artificially tight market ( we ca n't find qualified candidates , Congressman X , so please let us import more H1Bs.mostly 3</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they have HR departments that need to answer to legal departments, that's why.
The more objective criteria they use in hiring decisions, the more they'll be able to:1) stave off hiring/firing related lawsuits.. you didn't hire me but you hired him and I have a four year degree and he doesn't...2) attract investors who need the hand holding of knowing that they only hire "the best".3) create an artificially tight market (we can't find qualified candidates, Congressman X, so please let us import more H1Bs.mostly 3</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108812</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>arjan\_t</author>
	<datestamp>1258279080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're not talking about trained vs. untrained, you're talking about stupid vs. intelligent, and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent, you can be stupid while still having a degree.</p></div><p>
True, although the ones who <i>really</i> lack any level of intelligence usually don't get the degree either. They tend to drop out in their first year, or second year at most. When I started my CS degree, we had an initial group of some 50 people. After the first semester this was down to some 35 persons and only some 15 persons made it to their second year. Eventually, 11 or so of those graduated. This by itself is a pretty good weeding out of non-talent, don't you think?
</p><p>
In practice I've seen more talentless people made it into a programmer job than I've seen talentless people completing their thesis.
</p><p>
Also, don't forget that the reverse of your statement doesn't hold at all. You say you can be stupid while still having a degree, but of course one can also be intelligent <b>AND</b> have a degree. Unless you can provide some prove that an education makes one dumber (I don't think you can), I would say that having a degree and being intelligent is a sure win over being intelligent but don't having a degree.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not talking about trained vs. untrained , you 're talking about stupid vs. intelligent , and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent , you can be stupid while still having a degree .
True , although the ones who really lack any level of intelligence usually do n't get the degree either .
They tend to drop out in their first year , or second year at most .
When I started my CS degree , we had an initial group of some 50 people .
After the first semester this was down to some 35 persons and only some 15 persons made it to their second year .
Eventually , 11 or so of those graduated .
This by itself is a pretty good weeding out of non-talent , do n't you think ?
In practice I 've seen more talentless people made it into a programmer job than I 've seen talentless people completing their thesis .
Also , do n't forget that the reverse of your statement does n't hold at all .
You say you can be stupid while still having a degree , but of course one can also be intelligent AND have a degree .
Unless you can provide some prove that an education makes one dumber ( I do n't think you can ) , I would say that having a degree and being intelligent is a sure win over being intelligent but do n't having a degree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not talking about trained vs. untrained, you're talking about stupid vs. intelligent, and not only do you not need a degree to be intelligent, you can be stupid while still having a degree.
True, although the ones who really lack any level of intelligence usually don't get the degree either.
They tend to drop out in their first year, or second year at most.
When I started my CS degree, we had an initial group of some 50 people.
After the first semester this was down to some 35 persons and only some 15 persons made it to their second year.
Eventually, 11 or so of those graduated.
This by itself is a pretty good weeding out of non-talent, don't you think?
In practice I've seen more talentless people made it into a programmer job than I've seen talentless people completing their thesis.
Also, don't forget that the reverse of your statement doesn't hold at all.
You say you can be stupid while still having a degree, but of course one can also be intelligent AND have a degree.
Unless you can provide some prove that an education makes one dumber (I don't think you can), I would say that having a degree and being intelligent is a sure win over being intelligent but don't having a degree.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110672</id>
	<title>If you have to ask why...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258293060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You probably don't understand the value of a 4+ years degree.  It is not just about "coding" or any other highly specific portion of the technical realm. Its about thinking. My experience is that 4+ years degrees require critical thinking, not just "learning the ropes."</htmltext>
<tokenext>You probably do n't understand the value of a 4 + years degree .
It is not just about " coding " or any other highly specific portion of the technical realm .
Its about thinking .
My experience is that 4 + years degrees require critical thinking , not just " learning the ropes .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You probably don't understand the value of a 4+ years degree.
It is not just about "coding" or any other highly specific portion of the technical realm.
Its about thinking.
My experience is that 4+ years degrees require critical thinking, not just "learning the ropes.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108058</id>
	<title>Is there statistical support?</title>
	<author>glebovitz</author>
	<datestamp>1258317840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this the age old argument between technicians and scientists? Before computers people argued why engineers with bachelors degrees were more qualified than technicians who learned the same technical material.</p><p>Compensation and position is often linked to hiring and pay standards within companies. Many companies base pay on level of education independent of the actual value the individual provides. I am guessing that these standards are developed based on industry statistics that demonstrate a relationship between education and performance. This is likely why certain schools are in higher demand than others.</p><p>Yes, there are exceptions and I imagine that  many companies have other criteria for compensating individuals who demonstrate performance, but companies usually develop pay standards based on experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this the age old argument between technicians and scientists ?
Before computers people argued why engineers with bachelors degrees were more qualified than technicians who learned the same technical material.Compensation and position is often linked to hiring and pay standards within companies .
Many companies base pay on level of education independent of the actual value the individual provides .
I am guessing that these standards are developed based on industry statistics that demonstrate a relationship between education and performance .
This is likely why certain schools are in higher demand than others.Yes , there are exceptions and I imagine that many companies have other criteria for compensating individuals who demonstrate performance , but companies usually develop pay standards based on experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this the age old argument between technicians and scientists?
Before computers people argued why engineers with bachelors degrees were more qualified than technicians who learned the same technical material.Compensation and position is often linked to hiring and pay standards within companies.
Many companies base pay on level of education independent of the actual value the individual provides.
I am guessing that these standards are developed based on industry statistics that demonstrate a relationship between education and performance.
This is likely why certain schools are in higher demand than others.Yes, there are exceptions and I imagine that  many companies have other criteria for compensating individuals who demonstrate performance, but companies usually develop pay standards based on experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114124</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258378260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The trick with the advanced degree is to be able to afford it!  This isn't a "thinly veiled" class warfare commentary.  It's plain as day.</p><p>The question I'd have is whether or not your employer needs or wants high-end algorithms.   I'm sure that trade school programmers know when they are in over their heads.  It's the employers who get in over their heads when they pump up job descriptions and try to get over-qualified employees who are a flight risk, write overly complex code that others can't support and aren't willing to work on the more mundane parts of the job.</p><p>Face it.  Most programming jobs are about creating bar charts for the next executive meeting.  The code will mean nothing next week.  It's the data that's important.</p><p>Having an advanced degree doesn't guarantee anything and since most employers don't program, they are using poor judgment if they trust too much in those titles and create an environment where exaggeration is the norm and cheating about your qualifications is just the next logical step.  There's no substitute for understanding the skills your employees bring to the table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The trick with the advanced degree is to be able to afford it !
This is n't a " thinly veiled " class warfare commentary .
It 's plain as day.The question I 'd have is whether or not your employer needs or wants high-end algorithms .
I 'm sure that trade school programmers know when they are in over their heads .
It 's the employers who get in over their heads when they pump up job descriptions and try to get over-qualified employees who are a flight risk , write overly complex code that others ca n't support and are n't willing to work on the more mundane parts of the job.Face it .
Most programming jobs are about creating bar charts for the next executive meeting .
The code will mean nothing next week .
It 's the data that 's important.Having an advanced degree does n't guarantee anything and since most employers do n't program , they are using poor judgment if they trust too much in those titles and create an environment where exaggeration is the norm and cheating about your qualifications is just the next logical step .
There 's no substitute for understanding the skills your employees bring to the table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trick with the advanced degree is to be able to afford it!
This isn't a "thinly veiled" class warfare commentary.
It's plain as day.The question I'd have is whether or not your employer needs or wants high-end algorithms.
I'm sure that trade school programmers know when they are in over their heads.
It's the employers who get in over their heads when they pump up job descriptions and try to get over-qualified employees who are a flight risk, write overly complex code that others can't support and aren't willing to work on the more mundane parts of the job.Face it.
Most programming jobs are about creating bar charts for the next executive meeting.
The code will mean nothing next week.
It's the data that's important.Having an advanced degree doesn't guarantee anything and since most employers don't program, they are using poor judgment if they trust too much in those titles and create an environment where exaggeration is the norm and cheating about your qualifications is just the next logical step.
There's no substitute for understanding the skills your employees bring to the table.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107438</id>
	<title>Problem solving and novel approches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258314420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm an ex-physicist turned finance quant. Most of my time is spent coding. I learned to code because I had to simulate my experiments in grad school. My first and only programming course was Fortran in freshman year.<br> <br>But I and others in my group often find ourselves explaining the technical aspect of a process to the ones who are supposed to be the computer experts.<br> <br>My conclusion is that, although they have been taught many things about many different systems, they haven't been taught how to really solve problems. Hard problems, whose solution may not even exist. It's a cliche that I never thought I'd hear myself say, but they really don't know how to think outside the box. And there probably isn't a shortcut to teaching someone that kind of ability. It just takes time and well-rounded experiences, that can come from years of varied (i.e. not just comp sci) classwork or, in my case, years of frustration in a lab. Cookie-cutter comp sci coursework won't get someone the skills they need to do my job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an ex-physicist turned finance quant .
Most of my time is spent coding .
I learned to code because I had to simulate my experiments in grad school .
My first and only programming course was Fortran in freshman year .
But I and others in my group often find ourselves explaining the technical aspect of a process to the ones who are supposed to be the computer experts .
My conclusion is that , although they have been taught many things about many different systems , they have n't been taught how to really solve problems .
Hard problems , whose solution may not even exist .
It 's a cliche that I never thought I 'd hear myself say , but they really do n't know how to think outside the box .
And there probably is n't a shortcut to teaching someone that kind of ability .
It just takes time and well-rounded experiences , that can come from years of varied ( i.e .
not just comp sci ) classwork or , in my case , years of frustration in a lab .
Cookie-cutter comp sci coursework wo n't get someone the skills they need to do my job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an ex-physicist turned finance quant.
Most of my time is spent coding.
I learned to code because I had to simulate my experiments in grad school.
My first and only programming course was Fortran in freshman year.
But I and others in my group often find ourselves explaining the technical aspect of a process to the ones who are supposed to be the computer experts.
My conclusion is that, although they have been taught many things about many different systems, they haven't been taught how to really solve problems.
Hard problems, whose solution may not even exist.
It's a cliche that I never thought I'd hear myself say, but they really don't know how to think outside the box.
And there probably isn't a shortcut to teaching someone that kind of ability.
It just takes time and well-rounded experiences, that can come from years of varied (i.e.
not just comp sci) classwork or, in my case, years of frustration in a lab.
Cookie-cutter comp sci coursework won't get someone the skills they need to do my job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111140</id>
	<title>'Maturity' of CS causes change in education</title>
	<author>mschuyler</author>
	<datestamp>1258298160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm as old as dirt. When I went to college, there weren't any computers available. By the time I got to grad school, colleges were enamored with computers. I actually took a course in BASIC in grad school, something they MAY do in Elementary School today--or not. I learned BASIC via punched cards where "&gt;" was "GT" but, hey! (It was a CDC 6000, same computer as BG used as a teenager.) I thought it was SO COOL!!!! So when the Commodore PET came out I held fire, and when the Trash-80 came out (I loved the wafting plymers of its smell) I just waited, and when the Apple ][ came out, I splurged and by the time I got rid of it, I had spent $7,000 on it with the CP/M card, and all that stuff. And when my boss said, "I think we ought to investigate computers," I humbly suggested an Apple, and she gave me $5,000 to do it. The rest, as they say, is history. I bought one of the first IBM PC's, and by the time I retired, I had purchased several minis and probably on the order of 700 PCs. Also, I might add, I paid my mortgage writing about them for 20 years.</p><p>I say this to give background. The point is that when the computer revolution happened, I was there. I lived in it and I loved it, but I was largely self-taught. No one else had a computer at home, and so when our business needed to 'automate,' I was salivating at the head of the line saying "Me! Me! Me!" Who else could they possibly have chosen? Besides, by that time I had learned some Pascal, some dBase, some Fortran and COBOL, not to mention Visicalc. I did the CNE shtick just to try to keep up. And I did. I put in our first Frame Relay Ethernet network, then went to the class to see if I did it right. So that's how I became an IT guy.</p><p>But nowadays with the background I had, I could NEVER become an IT person because my industry, when they need an IT person, recruits for one with that amount of knowledge in education. This is simply the maturity of the industry. The same thing happened with electricity, with airplanes, and with any number of fields that simply did not previously exist. They turned from hobbies into professions. Once there was enough background material and a 'recognized body of knowledge' to turn IT into a profession, we folks who learned by doing and pulled ourselves into the field with our bootstraps, and, if I may say, BUILT IT FROM SCRATCH, became outmoded. As someone said, "any profession is a conspiracy against the laity."</p><p>I consider myself very lucky to have been able to participate in this field. When I first started there was a computer on one desk: Mine! By the time I retired there were twice as many computers as employees. My work here is done. I am grateful to a lot of people, including BG, for making my career possible. I am now happily retired with no network responsibilities at all, but still addicted to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm as old as dirt .
When I went to college , there were n't any computers available .
By the time I got to grad school , colleges were enamored with computers .
I actually took a course in BASIC in grad school , something they MAY do in Elementary School today--or not .
I learned BASIC via punched cards where " &gt; " was " GT " but , hey !
( It was a CDC 6000 , same computer as BG used as a teenager .
) I thought it was SO COOL ! ! ! !
So when the Commodore PET came out I held fire , and when the Trash-80 came out ( I loved the wafting plymers of its smell ) I just waited , and when the Apple ] [ came out , I splurged and by the time I got rid of it , I had spent $ 7,000 on it with the CP/M card , and all that stuff .
And when my boss said , " I think we ought to investigate computers , " I humbly suggested an Apple , and she gave me $ 5,000 to do it .
The rest , as they say , is history .
I bought one of the first IBM PC 's , and by the time I retired , I had purchased several minis and probably on the order of 700 PCs .
Also , I might add , I paid my mortgage writing about them for 20 years.I say this to give background .
The point is that when the computer revolution happened , I was there .
I lived in it and I loved it , but I was largely self-taught .
No one else had a computer at home , and so when our business needed to 'automate, ' I was salivating at the head of the line saying " Me !
Me ! Me !
" Who else could they possibly have chosen ?
Besides , by that time I had learned some Pascal , some dBase , some Fortran and COBOL , not to mention Visicalc .
I did the CNE shtick just to try to keep up .
And I did .
I put in our first Frame Relay Ethernet network , then went to the class to see if I did it right .
So that 's how I became an IT guy.But nowadays with the background I had , I could NEVER become an IT person because my industry , when they need an IT person , recruits for one with that amount of knowledge in education .
This is simply the maturity of the industry .
The same thing happened with electricity , with airplanes , and with any number of fields that simply did not previously exist .
They turned from hobbies into professions .
Once there was enough background material and a 'recognized body of knowledge ' to turn IT into a profession , we folks who learned by doing and pulled ourselves into the field with our bootstraps , and , if I may say , BUILT IT FROM SCRATCH , became outmoded .
As someone said , " any profession is a conspiracy against the laity .
" I consider myself very lucky to have been able to participate in this field .
When I first started there was a computer on one desk : Mine !
By the time I retired there were twice as many computers as employees .
My work here is done .
I am grateful to a lot of people , including BG , for making my career possible .
I am now happily retired with no network responsibilities at all , but still addicted to /.Thank you !
Thank you !
Thank you !
Thank you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm as old as dirt.
When I went to college, there weren't any computers available.
By the time I got to grad school, colleges were enamored with computers.
I actually took a course in BASIC in grad school, something they MAY do in Elementary School today--or not.
I learned BASIC via punched cards where "&gt;" was "GT" but, hey!
(It was a CDC 6000, same computer as BG used as a teenager.
) I thought it was SO COOL!!!!
So when the Commodore PET came out I held fire, and when the Trash-80 came out (I loved the wafting plymers of its smell) I just waited, and when the Apple ][ came out, I splurged and by the time I got rid of it, I had spent $7,000 on it with the CP/M card, and all that stuff.
And when my boss said, "I think we ought to investigate computers," I humbly suggested an Apple, and she gave me $5,000 to do it.
The rest, as they say, is history.
I bought one of the first IBM PC's, and by the time I retired, I had purchased several minis and probably on the order of 700 PCs.
Also, I might add, I paid my mortgage writing about them for 20 years.I say this to give background.
The point is that when the computer revolution happened, I was there.
I lived in it and I loved it, but I was largely self-taught.
No one else had a computer at home, and so when our business needed to 'automate,' I was salivating at the head of the line saying "Me!
Me! Me!
" Who else could they possibly have chosen?
Besides, by that time I had learned some Pascal, some dBase, some Fortran and COBOL, not to mention Visicalc.
I did the CNE shtick just to try to keep up.
And I did.
I put in our first Frame Relay Ethernet network, then went to the class to see if I did it right.
So that's how I became an IT guy.But nowadays with the background I had, I could NEVER become an IT person because my industry, when they need an IT person, recruits for one with that amount of knowledge in education.
This is simply the maturity of the industry.
The same thing happened with electricity, with airplanes, and with any number of fields that simply did not previously exist.
They turned from hobbies into professions.
Once there was enough background material and a 'recognized body of knowledge' to turn IT into a profession, we folks who learned by doing and pulled ourselves into the field with our bootstraps, and, if I may say, BUILT IT FROM SCRATCH, became outmoded.
As someone said, "any profession is a conspiracy against the laity.
"I consider myself very lucky to have been able to participate in this field.
When I first started there was a computer on one desk: Mine!
By the time I retired there were twice as many computers as employees.
My work here is done.
I am grateful to a lot of people, including BG, for making my career possible.
I am now happily retired with no network responsibilities at all, but still addicted to /.Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108480</id>
	<title>Re:then you're not a real developer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258277040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers. It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English. If you worked for me, I would probably personally escort you out the front door.</p></div></blockquote><p>Firstly, it's doubtful that I'd be working for you.</p><p>Secondly, if you attempted to escort me out the door without security you'd find yourself with a broken nose, lying on the ground crying to your mum.<br>Thirdly, it is <b>NOT</b> too much to ask that the remote teams have workable English that borders upon fluency. Productivity and group cohesion are influenced by the ability to communicate effectively.</p><blockquote><div><p>But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR.</p></div></blockquote><p>No son, you'd be the one talking to HR for being an ineffective leader. If perchance I did work for you you'd be out of the catbird seat post-haste.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers .
It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English .
If you worked for me , I would probably personally escort you out the front door.Firstly , it 's doubtful that I 'd be working for you.Secondly , if you attempted to escort me out the door without security you 'd find yourself with a broken nose , lying on the ground crying to your mum.Thirdly , it is NOT too much to ask that the remote teams have workable English that borders upon fluency .
Productivity and group cohesion are influenced by the ability to communicate effectively.But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR.No son , you 'd be the one talking to HR for being an ineffective leader .
If perchance I did work for you you 'd be out of the catbird seat post-haste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Real developers have to work with teams that are not native English speakers.
It would be completely unacceptable to have such an arrogant attitude because your Chinese or French coworkers have inferior communication skills in English.
If you worked for me, I would probably personally escort you out the front door.Firstly, it's doubtful that I'd be working for you.Secondly, if you attempted to escort me out the door without security you'd find yourself with a broken nose, lying on the ground crying to your mum.Thirdly, it is NOT too much to ask that the remote teams have workable English that borders upon fluency.
Productivity and group cohesion are influenced by the ability to communicate effectively.But being an irritating twerp about it is a quick way to find yourself talking with HR.No son, you'd be the one talking to HR for being an ineffective leader.
If perchance I did work for you you'd be out of the catbird seat post-haste.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107752</id>
	<title>Re:Important difference</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258316460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have a degree, but my brother was a TA at a well-known university. I've often graded the exams for him and usually the students that I graded bitched because I was very rough with them and they got lower grades than the others (they didn't know I used to help my brother). I know more than some of the teachers in that university and I only went to high-school. I'm not some genius boy-wonder, but I just liked to study a lot and I couldn't stand one bit of the whole "educational" system. I find it to be mostly crap, just giving some people (teachers) a way of life. There were very only a couple of real teachers I've met in my life: my mid-school math teacher and my high-school history teacher always found a way to make things interesting and make me learn. The others were complete idiots with carrots up their asses who didn't know half of what I knew about whatever they were trying to "teach". I don't have a problem with authority, I just find school to be <i>extremely</i> boring. I enjoy challenges and that's what my boss likes about me so I always get the toughest job even if, theoretically, I am the least prepared employee in our company, because everyone else has an engineering degree. I've thought about buying one myself (about 3000 EUR) but then I changed my mind and I realized I wouldn't even want to work in a place where all resumes are mechanically filtered and nobody even reads their contents if they don't list at least one engineering degree.<br>OTOH, I'm very lucky to have found this job, because many companies called me an amateur when I went to interviews while any of their employees knew less than the university teachers did. I've even challenged an interviewer once an he failed. I've proven to him that I was better than him and then he said I've been rejected because I was "overqualified". I replied "but first you said I was underqualified and you only called me for this interview because I've worked for company X". Their answer was just "fuck you, get out".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a degree , but my brother was a TA at a well-known university .
I 've often graded the exams for him and usually the students that I graded bitched because I was very rough with them and they got lower grades than the others ( they did n't know I used to help my brother ) .
I know more than some of the teachers in that university and I only went to high-school .
I 'm not some genius boy-wonder , but I just liked to study a lot and I could n't stand one bit of the whole " educational " system .
I find it to be mostly crap , just giving some people ( teachers ) a way of life .
There were very only a couple of real teachers I 've met in my life : my mid-school math teacher and my high-school history teacher always found a way to make things interesting and make me learn .
The others were complete idiots with carrots up their asses who did n't know half of what I knew about whatever they were trying to " teach " .
I do n't have a problem with authority , I just find school to be extremely boring .
I enjoy challenges and that 's what my boss likes about me so I always get the toughest job even if , theoretically , I am the least prepared employee in our company , because everyone else has an engineering degree .
I 've thought about buying one myself ( about 3000 EUR ) but then I changed my mind and I realized I would n't even want to work in a place where all resumes are mechanically filtered and nobody even reads their contents if they do n't list at least one engineering degree.OTOH , I 'm very lucky to have found this job , because many companies called me an amateur when I went to interviews while any of their employees knew less than the university teachers did .
I 've even challenged an interviewer once an he failed .
I 've proven to him that I was better than him and then he said I 've been rejected because I was " overqualified " .
I replied " but first you said I was underqualified and you only called me for this interview because I 've worked for company X " .
Their answer was just " fuck you , get out " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a degree, but my brother was a TA at a well-known university.
I've often graded the exams for him and usually the students that I graded bitched because I was very rough with them and they got lower grades than the others (they didn't know I used to help my brother).
I know more than some of the teachers in that university and I only went to high-school.
I'm not some genius boy-wonder, but I just liked to study a lot and I couldn't stand one bit of the whole "educational" system.
I find it to be mostly crap, just giving some people (teachers) a way of life.
There were very only a couple of real teachers I've met in my life: my mid-school math teacher and my high-school history teacher always found a way to make things interesting and make me learn.
The others were complete idiots with carrots up their asses who didn't know half of what I knew about whatever they were trying to "teach".
I don't have a problem with authority, I just find school to be extremely boring.
I enjoy challenges and that's what my boss likes about me so I always get the toughest job even if, theoretically, I am the least prepared employee in our company, because everyone else has an engineering degree.
I've thought about buying one myself (about 3000 EUR) but then I changed my mind and I realized I wouldn't even want to work in a place where all resumes are mechanically filtered and nobody even reads their contents if they don't list at least one engineering degree.OTOH, I'm very lucky to have found this job, because many companies called me an amateur when I went to interviews while any of their employees knew less than the university teachers did.
I've even challenged an interviewer once an he failed.
I've proven to him that I was better than him and then he said I've been rejected because I was "overqualified".
I replied "but first you said I was underqualified and you only called me for this interview because I've worked for company X".
Their answer was just "fuck you, get out".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108410</id>
	<title>What stigma?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1258276680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have a four-year degree, in CS or anything else. Most of my time working as a programmer, I've worked with people, most of whom had degrees (usually CS or math or physics, sometimes something else). There was a time when I was a team lead, and both people working under me had degrees.</p><p>I never found it to be a problem for my career, or when interacting with my teammates. Judging by everything that I've seen, the general perception in this industry is that good experience and knowledge always beat formal education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a four-year degree , in CS or anything else .
Most of my time working as a programmer , I 've worked with people , most of whom had degrees ( usually CS or math or physics , sometimes something else ) .
There was a time when I was a team lead , and both people working under me had degrees.I never found it to be a problem for my career , or when interacting with my teammates .
Judging by everything that I 've seen , the general perception in this industry is that good experience and knowledge always beat formal education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a four-year degree, in CS or anything else.
Most of my time working as a programmer, I've worked with people, most of whom had degrees (usually CS or math or physics, sometimes something else).
There was a time when I was a team lead, and both people working under me had degrees.I never found it to be a problem for my career, or when interacting with my teammates.
Judging by everything that I've seen, the general perception in this industry is that good experience and knowledge always beat formal education.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113164</id>
	<title>Re:Slaves wear collars</title>
	<author>kaizokuace</author>
	<datestamp>1258365540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you can wear a red shirt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you can wear a red shirt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you can wear a red shirt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107908</id>
	<title>It does really matter</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1258317240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my experience if management is poor and doesn't know how to hire good developers then it doesn't matter if they have a degree or not. A degree doesn't necessarily mean anything but when you put weight into that and only that then you're just as likely to end up with awful developers as someone who wants to only hire those with no degrees (if there is such a thing).
<br> <br>
A decent talk between knowledgeable employees and potential candidates can filter out the crap. Decent testing helps too. If they know they stuff I don't really care if they learned it off the back of cereal box or not.
<br> <br>
What I find most entertaining are those jobs that specify that you have a degree from a certain university. They're clearly limiting themselves quite a bit and it clearly stinks of elitism over actual decent candidates. Even if they would give me a job I wouldn't take it. The other developers may be good but there is a very good chance the management will suck ass.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience if management is poor and does n't know how to hire good developers then it does n't matter if they have a degree or not .
A degree does n't necessarily mean anything but when you put weight into that and only that then you 're just as likely to end up with awful developers as someone who wants to only hire those with no degrees ( if there is such a thing ) .
A decent talk between knowledgeable employees and potential candidates can filter out the crap .
Decent testing helps too .
If they know they stuff I do n't really care if they learned it off the back of cereal box or not .
What I find most entertaining are those jobs that specify that you have a degree from a certain university .
They 're clearly limiting themselves quite a bit and it clearly stinks of elitism over actual decent candidates .
Even if they would give me a job I would n't take it .
The other developers may be good but there is a very good chance the management will suck ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience if management is poor and doesn't know how to hire good developers then it doesn't matter if they have a degree or not.
A degree doesn't necessarily mean anything but when you put weight into that and only that then you're just as likely to end up with awful developers as someone who wants to only hire those with no degrees (if there is such a thing).
A decent talk between knowledgeable employees and potential candidates can filter out the crap.
Decent testing helps too.
If they know they stuff I don't really care if they learned it off the back of cereal box or not.
What I find most entertaining are those jobs that specify that you have a degree from a certain university.
They're clearly limiting themselves quite a bit and it clearly stinks of elitism over actual decent candidates.
Even if they would give me a job I wouldn't take it.
The other developers may be good but there is a very good chance the management will suck ass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113150</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>bitspotter</author>
	<datestamp>1258365420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the same reason investment bankers wreck the entire economy by taking unwarranted risks with massive amounts of money, and still get government bailouts and multi-milion bonuses and call it "retaining talent".</p><p>Pay does not correlate with skill, talent, or value.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason investment bankers wreck the entire economy by taking unwarranted risks with massive amounts of money , and still get government bailouts and multi-milion bonuses and call it " retaining talent " .Pay does not correlate with skill , talent , or value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason investment bankers wreck the entire economy by taking unwarranted risks with massive amounts of money, and still get government bailouts and multi-milion bonuses and call it "retaining talent".Pay does not correlate with skill, talent, or value.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109612</id>
	<title>History</title>
	<author>pmontra</author>
	<datestamp>1258284900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mostly offtopic, why do you guys in the USA have to study history in CS or other scientific courses? There are all those long years of school before university to learn history. Why losing time with that instead of studying something related to CS? I had to study history for 13 years before university. If I didn't know it by then a 6 months course at university would have been useless anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mostly offtopic , why do you guys in the USA have to study history in CS or other scientific courses ?
There are all those long years of school before university to learn history .
Why losing time with that instead of studying something related to CS ?
I had to study history for 13 years before university .
If I did n't know it by then a 6 months course at university would have been useless anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mostly offtopic, why do you guys in the USA have to study history in CS or other scientific courses?
There are all those long years of school before university to learn history.
Why losing time with that instead of studying something related to CS?
I had to study history for 13 years before university.
If I didn't know it by then a 6 months course at university would have been useless anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30124440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30126614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30202944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30118166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110442
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_15_172257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30119794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107684
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108480
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108838
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112528
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109642
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30117178
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30113164
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30124440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30112036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30202944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110960
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107714
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108236
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110930
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30118166
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110630
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30126614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107730
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114360
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30115390
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114124
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30114474
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30110906
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30111948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30116460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30121440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107286
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_15_172257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30107892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30109146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_15_172257.30108388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
