From: blockedofcourse@foo.invalid   
      
   >> I think the bigger problem is the ego and (type of) involvement of the   
   >> parent(s).  I've spoken with many teachers who claim they are afraid to   
   >> grade their students based on merit -- the parents raise holy hell   
   >> if THEIR kid isn't an "A" student.   
   >>   
   >> [Not unexpected in light of the prevalence of helicopter parents -- did YOUR   
   >> parents ever attend a job interview with you??]   
   >   
   > I would have been horrified if my parents had ever suggested that they should   
   > attend a job interview with me.   
      
   Sadly, that is not the case, presently.  I see this as an extension of the   
   "my kid is the best -- and don't you say or think otherwise!"... even if   
   the kid is dumb as a post!   
      
   >> This instills a false sense of "competence" in the kid.  A neighbor's son is   
   >> upset that he hasn't been PROMOTED after 6 months on the job... what the   
   hell   
   >> have you DONE in those 6 months that thinks you MERIT a promotion?   
   >   
   > Hmm I probably was promoted after 6 months in my first job. That's partly   
   because   
   > that's what the organization did with new graduates but it's also partly   
   because I could   
   > use a soldering iron and do plenty of other things I wasn't taught on a   
   degree course.   
   >  From a coding point of view I could not only code (mostly in assembler) but   
   I had   
   > already seen many examples of how to do things. So when I had to get an 8051   
   to   
   > do 32-bit division and convert the result to decimal for a display it wasn't   
   too hard.   
      
   I never had an "entry level" full time job.  I was always a senior design   
   engineer or system analyst or etc.  I always had support staff to handle   
   the mundane aspects of the job though often did them myself (out of concern   
   for getting the RIGHT result, first time.  E.g., I wire-wrapped my first   
   CPU and the associated MPU just to be sure it got done correctly.  So,   
   first application of power had the system up and running -- instead of fussing   
   with a technician trying to defend his mistakes).   
      
   >>> There's also a difference between what is taught and what is needed in a   
   workplace.   
   >>> I could use a soldering iron when I got my degree, but most other   
   graduates couldn't.   
   >>   
   >> I disagree.  Skills are easy to pick up -- how long do you think it would   
   take   
   >> to teach someone how to make a reliable solder joint?   
   >   
   > As far as making a reliable solder joint is concerned I've seen many   
   outcomes.   
   > This is from prototype testing not production.   
   > Here are some possible outcomes.   
   >   
   > 1. Perfect joint.   
   >   
   > 2. Perfect joint after being shown that keeping your wrist on the bench   
   while you   
   > make the joint will keep your hand steady.   
   >   
   > 3. Good effort but here's how to remove grime and oxide film from the   
   resistor's   
   > legs before you solder it.   
   >   
   > 4. Deliberately poor joint because "I shouldn't have to do this".   
      
   So, put a number on how many HOURS it would take you to learn this.   
   Then, decide which hours of coursework you would forego to learn   
   this skill in school.  And, your strategy for picking up that material   
   in the workplace?   
      
   I can't think of any course that I would have sacrificed to learn   
   some skill that I could pick up in OJT.  A colleague at an IBM division   
   that I was working with showed me the important aspects of wirewrapping   
   as it was directly applicable to the system I was troubleshooting for them.   
   And, pointed me at some of the better tools available that I would later   
   use (having purchased them for myself) to do that sort of work.   
      
   I doubt I would have found such a person who would have sat down and   
   taught me about the architecture of a B5500.  Or, the A* algorithm.   
   Likely, none of the folks I've worked with KNOW these things!   
      
   >> What is needed in the workplace is the ability to LEARN.   
   >   
   > Sure but if student's aren't learning during their college years then they   
   are likely   
   > to think that that's how it will always be.   
      
   It's BEFORE college.  Once you start letting kids "advance" without the   
   requisite skill sets, they are doomed.  They won't have the foundation for the   
   next set of skills.  Which makes it unlikely that they will master THOSE.   
   Which will hinder their progress in the Thereafter.  etc.   
      
   Do kids ever "stay back" (repeat a grade) anymore?  Or, is this so abhorrent   
   to their folks that they press the school system to let little tommy move   
   along thinking he'll be better equipped to handle the next year's curriculum?   
      
   >> Because only   
   >> backwards looking businesses/industries worry about "today" as tomorrow will   
   >> be here momentarily.  If your new hires are only good with today's   
   skillsets,   
   >> you'll be shit out of luck come tomorrow!   
   >>   
   >> Interviews (hiring processes) that rely on the applicant regurgitating some   
   >> particular canned response are notoriously short sighted.   
   >   
   > I remember being asked how I would add numbers together at 10 MHz.   
   > After giving my answer the interviewer told me that most people would say   
   > use a microprocessor. (Not possible with a cpu back then even if you could   
   > clock the thing at 10 MHz.)   
      
   That depends on the width of the numbers (affects the propagation of carries   
   from LSbs) and whether or not you want to have a *throughput* of 10M/s or   
   a complete result in 100ns.  Add two 1b values in a single XOR propagation   
   delay.  Not quite that quick with 64b values!   
      
   The "DRAW" opcode in my first processor implemented the following:   
      ; scale the (dX,dY) vector by the associated scale factors (Ax, Ay)   
      x = Ax * dX   
      y = Ay * dY   
      
      ; determine how much each axis can be scaled up to fit under its limit   
      Bx = Kx / x   
      By = Ky / y   
      
      ; find minimum of those factors (ensures neither will exceed its limit)   
      G = min(Bx,By)   
      
      ; scale the "scaled vector" to approach each appropriate limit   
      Ox = G * x   
      Oy = G * y   
      
      ; reduce time by an equivalent factor   
      T = Kt / G   
   in just under 2 microseconds.  In ~1980.   
      
   Had I not been exposed to the B5500 et al., I would have implemented this   
   in a more traditional, serial manner achieving perhaps 5% of the overall   
   performance -- instead of having multiple pipeline stages to increase   
   throughput!  And, no one would have thought to tell me about the optimizations   
   that I could have made in the hardware "from historical perspective".   
      
   >> We teach kids how to design algorithms using a completely bogus "programming   
   >> language" that exists nowhere else.  A handful of "opcodes" (move l/r/f/b,   
   >> probe, rotate 90/180/270, etc.) that a 10 year old can easily understand   
   >> (no concerns about overflow, exceptions, cancellation, races, etc.).  And,   
   >> to which he can PHYSICALLY relate.   
   >   
   > Well you don't seem to be able to buy a simple SC/MP board and solder it   
   > together yourself any more.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)