From: Paul Grant (shade999@optonline.net)
Date: Thu Jul 17 2003 - 21:38:14 MDT
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 22:03, Paul Grant wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 07:26:37AM -0400, Harvey Newstrom wrote: The
> >list has a lot of software types, and surely the professional
>
> programmers must be having a severe case of Custer Syndrome: "Where
> are all these frigging Indians coming from?"
>
> I wish :) I was let go and haven't even been able to get an interview
> for a software position :)
>
What surprises me is that more people don't question the economic theory
and
practice that produced the current pattern of > 1 million trained
software
people being out of work and without much of a prospect in the US.
Since
in fact we are short of all levels of software skill or believed we were
a
few years ago, the loss of this many workers is a tragedy to extropic
dreams
on more than a personal and humanitarian scale. We have a
monetary/financial crisis but we act as if it is only a small
fluctuation in
demand/need. It is not. The need did not change. The financial
resources
to operate changed a lot. Demand and finances are not as well and
cleanly
connected as some might like to imagine.
Me: Definately have to say I agree; fundamentally I think its the
artificial
inflation of the US dollar versus other countries... Until that
equalizes,
pretty much the only way for us to remain dominant is either services
that
can't be out-sourced, straight out consumption [we control the major
market]
, or our "patent" portfolio as we sign more and more countries into the
rope-a-dope strategy of the century [against under-developed countries].
> >Dynamic and practical optimism has been more difficult in the last
> couple years, has it not?
>
> I don't necessarily agree; I'm optimistic insofar as I think that
> eventually I'll be able to extricate myself out of the current mess...
> and certes, it doesn't
> really effect my ability to read and contemplate current and "future"
> technologies/paradigms in that the cost (at worst) is TV and other
> mindless activities....
>
I hope not too much of that. :-) Really, the one major resource you
have
right now is time. Please use it as wisely as you can.
Me: HEHEHE :) Don't worry about me :) My current sticking point
for some basic projects is space; other more complex projects require
extensive preparation in applied science. In any event, I've been
using my last year or two "off" too do a complete circuit in terms
of whats out currently out there :) Further development requires
movement into the application phase which will be (finally) starting
august 15th or so with my move to California :)
> I do have to say though, as a person who is extremely dedicated to
> pursuing his own ideas out to their logical conclusion, resources,
> *particularly* people resources, are next to impossible to come by
> [barring government/univ funding (where they get copyright/patent), or
> being fabulously independently wealthy]. Plus, to do anything
> significant, certain skills [which require a serious amount of effort
> and time to pickup] are currently beyond my ken. Currently :) But I
> do remain optimistic, that given enough time on this planet [- sudden
> death or illness], I'll hit my critical point in a couple of years :)
>
> More than anything else though, its the lack of a skilled [and
> dedicated] labor supply (read: architects rather than technicians).
> Unfortunately, I have yet to actually find a good (reliable) source
> for such [people] material.
You need good technicians in greater abundance than architects. But the
architects are certainly crucial.
Me: I prefer elegance than brute strength.
Ergo, one of the MAJOR problems i have with a field such as (say)
medicine, is that alot more of it should be automated. I've got
my out for such endeavors (stuff that fundamentally fixes broken
strategies in regards to what is currently termed "treatment").
Of course, I'm predisposed to that route of parsing problems
because of my particular affinity to computers and search/signal
stuff :)
One final point regarding technicians; I'ld rather have someone
focused, imaginative and perceptive rather than someone trained
to do a set of tasks particularly well, particularly when you plan
on doing stuff that may or may not run counter to the current
intuitive mindset. Ergo the classic difference of training
someone to do something urself as opposed to attempting to co-opt
a preexisting set of routines...
On the plus side, I am slowly starting to penetrate into the
strata of older people, who, IMHO, are far more useful than
todays youth, both in regards to knowledge, people networks,
funding sources and keen intellect :) I'm expecting the next
4-5 years to be particularly important as they will probably
found the next 10-15 years worth of private research.
To be quite honest, the biggest problem I have with the
current framework of science (both applied and theoretical)
is that to do anything, you basically have to give your research
away. Something I'm not willing to do, given the amount of
interesting technologies that are not allowed to progress
to fruitful conclusion due to either government or corporate
agendas. If I can make a difference, I want it to be done
outside the current (imho, broken) system that seems
to govern my current environment, preferentially to be
applied equally on a triage basis.
Like I said earlier, in general, I'm optimistic :)
Barring sudden death, mutiliation or (fatal) diseases.
Charlie Rose had a nobel laureate on TV, Wattson I think
(the guy who "discovered" DNA), and he pretty much said
the same thing :) Ergo alot of the problems we currently suffer
from have a basis in our genetics, and that given a certain amount of
cash, the genetic basis could be determined via sequencing and
a good patient history. To be DOUBLY honest, the largest
problem relating to such an endeavor, would not be the sequencing
(which require a certain amount of money X), but rather, a computeable
patient history sans border/language constraints. The current system
(in place in the US), CPT codes and diagnostics, is insufficient both
in its granularity, and its ability to form a self-consistent
knowledge base [e.g. computeable logic (knowledge base +
inference engine)].
I personally think all the money going into defense and politics should
be forcibly appropriated into the 21st century medical equivalent of
Roosevelts(or whichever presdient did it) hiway program. Something this
important should not be left up to the whims of private development,
especially considering the intellectual property rights nightmare it
represents.
I also think the US's notion of democracy is utterly broken, and needs
some serious voter reform. Not to mention our (often terribly cruel)
foreign policy. It really sucks that in this day and age, the concept
of nation-states is STILL not resolveable. Mind you, I don't want
a homogenous world government, but rather, a general system which
supersedes cultural boundaries in areas which require it [beneficial
to humanity as a whole], but leaves a majority of the population
with the ability to generate local settings as they see fit.
I haven't even begun to think of how to reform the education system,
or rather, how to teach people effectively... I'm good with one-on-one
development, but multiple children/adults [simoultaneously] generally
degrade my performance.
A bit longer than I intended, but :) c'est la vie :)
omard-out
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 17 2003 - 21:48:40 MDT