Every other business has figured out a way to operate on a single transaction model where I give them money and they give me a product and that is the end of our relationship until I need something else that they make. Somehow we have managed to operate in this manner for hundreds of years. Why is software development any different?
And yet so much of the spending goes to big ticket items benefitting defense contractors while things that actually benefit the soldiers (better armor, better VA hospitals) go by the wayside.
IDK what has been going on but people in my area seem to be getting their hands on professional-level fireworks that sound like bombs going off. It used to be the roman candles and the fountains and a gentle background noise around the neighborhood but now it's insane.
There are plenty of parts of the world where people are free to enjoy themselves but also considerate of others.
Yeah first 4th of July as a dog owner. He did relatively OK inside but we had a hell of a time taking him out for a walk. Every time we thought everyone was done blowing their loads someone else refueled and things started over again.
Engineering is a profession where individuals are certified by a governing body and required to maintain that certification through continuing education. The reason for that certification is because failure to follow the principles of the governing body can lead to injury or death, or to a lesser degree significant costs.
Given all the ways that software can have those same significant impacts, I believe that there should be some sort of level at which software developers are called engineers. However, I believe that designation should come with all the professional oversight that other engineering disciplines have.
Assuming you don't retire during one of the periodic market bust cycles. I think a lot of workers would rather see more return on that increase in capital now.
It's not a claim, there is psychological data supporting the negative impact stress can have on recall and that for some students a test is not the best way to identify their retained knowledge.
Your single example identifies a situation where we would want someone resilient to stress to pass the testing process.
However if you are evaluating someone's ability to identify characters in Shakespeare who are most closely representative of the Bard himself, a proctored exam may not be the only environment where that could be demonstrated.
Anyone in software knows as well that for a test to be effective it has to be written properly. In the history of academic and standardized testing however there has been little rigor in the construction of tests, and those who pass are ones who give the "right" answers regardless of whether those answers are true proofs of knowledge.
"A few weeks later, the project is finished. Watterson probably takes a moment to stand in the middle of the room and look up, contemplating the months of work, the tins of paint he went through, the things he learned about technique, about the joy of a job done for its own sake, about himself. Then he opens a tin of whitewash, climbs up the bed-chairs-table one last time, and paints over his work. He leaves the ceiling white, empty, fresh."
Is it Zen where they do this with mandalas? The monks spend forever building intricate sand paintings and then wipe/blow them away in an instant. Love it.
But without any training in experimental methodologies, molecular biology, protein mechanics, pharmacology, or any of the other specialized fields that make up the world of Alzheimer's research, how do you view yourself as qualified to make that conclusion? What body of knowledge are you drawing on to conclude that the experts' reasoning is sound, they are properly controlling their experiments, they are drawing the correct conclusions based on the underlying mechanics? AFAIK even people who do meta-analyses are qualified in the field they are doing the analysis for.
