Possible. It was a little short in my opinion and the reader could get the impression, that the US model is superior, because so much "wonders" are coming from it. But the wonders do not have anything to do with the education system, in my opinion.
1,352 karma · joined November 1, 2013
Of course you should not just "pay arbitrary amounts" to the universities but hold the people accountable for what they spent.
In the US you have millionaires came out of "nothing" (of course, from nice universities, nice contacts, etc), people jumping at opportunities, while in Europe this would take 2 meetings, 3 viability studies and 4 months.
Besides extreme things like Facebook, most people of the US are stick to their destiny. If you can't afford to attend an university, you have not much more chance to rise out of the dust in the US than in Europe. Those that succeed are very few. Of course those are presented everywhere, to prove the US dream.
People like Bill Gates never came from poor destiny. Gates parents already where rich. The rich in the US also provide, that people from lower classes don't enter theirs. You have to have visited the right university (costly!) or you have to have the right parents to get the well paid jobs -- or both of course.
Of course, the possibilities in some sectors like IT are better and when you have ideas, you can easier get some money. Also when you loose, you get easier a second chance ... but all that has nothing to do with the education system and even less with university fees.
How do you know that. Have you asked the people?
I doubt what you say (not about the loans, I guess you know better than I, but in the US people are really at the mercy of the banks).
Even, when only few are discouraged, you have a loss.
The UK gvnmt should know: You can't have both: Save money and have good education for all without losses. When many use the loans, the savings for the UK are limited, since not all will be able to repay the money in full. Also the UK looses the money from the people that did not attend university. And it looses innovation -- all things that can not be calculated, but might finally well excell the pennies, the UK saves now. It even might loose the future (UK already has nearly only banking left as most important industry, so innovation would be really needed to revive the former proud "empire").
Only lately, because the German govnmt wanted to save the costs for the universities, they invented the fees with the argument, that with more funding, the quality of education could be better. But many universities just used the money to cover costs, that where not covered any more from the money they got from the country.
So, essentially it was a cost reduction program to reduce costs for the state finance ... thus freeing money that could go to banks and big companies.
The system was not well received by the students and also some German countries dropped the program, thus putting some pressure on the others, since the students prefered the universities without fees. I guess, that was the reason now, that the last country dropped the fees.
In my opinion, countries like GB make a big error by forcing enormous fees unto students. In the result, the students which do not come from millionaires houses are either at the mercy of the banks for decades or many people that well could study, just do not. Thus the nation looses many talents (in both outcomes).
(Should we always add the current directory to the path in a REPL?)
Please also have a look on my suggestion for the search facility: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8391647
It would be really helpful, to just search for some keyword and have the last occurence (for example import) as template without the need for going back the history by hand.
One thing that I am missing already is searching inside the history for a specific input. There is some search facility (in vi mode, you can press / and it says that it will search), but I don't know how it works, since it gives no results.
Ok, now I see, it just marks the search results, but does not give an immediate result. That is not, what I would expect and what would be useful for me. In ksh, I believe, there was the possibility to search backwards in history and when it was performed, the most recent input line was put into the active input for replay or editing.
I find such a thing much more relevant, as when some president gets the peace nobel prize for things, he intended to do (and never did).
It seems, that primary Windows PCs are targeted, but since also a Flash exploit is targeted, that also existed on Linux, it is not clear to me, if a Linux system could be infected.
I don't know, if I visited the site at this specific date, but I am rather sure, that if I was, I used a Linux system.
Can somebody explain?
Those who are lucky enough to be touched by innovation
surround themselves in a bubble and dismiss everyone else.
Despite of (political correct) statistics made by the world bank, the inequality is rising in the world. Only look at the US. Once the US had a broad middle class. Today, the middle class is shrinking more and more and is replaced by quarters for the poor and others for the rich. The only reason, that it is not seen by most people is, that they stick in their own peer-group -- and do not look to much into the lives of others. Also, there is no country in the world that has that many people in prisons ...
But: I only looked on "Reichstag" elections -- not Presidential elections. I might be wrong here, but Reichstag should be Reichstag. The numbers where from the German wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahlen_in_Deutschland...
What we here are discussing is really depending on focus. Fact is, that the NSDAP had more seats in the Reichstag than any other single party in 1932 and 1933 (3 elections -- they had many, because of the instabilities of the governments). In the US, there are only 2 major parties -- so the party with the absolute majority wins. But in Germany (also today) it is very rare, that one single party reaches 50% or more of the votes. It is really very often, that the biggest single party has 33% or less of the votes. What is done, a coalition is made with an other party -- or even two other parties to reach a majority.
Same thing was done 1933. So it was totally normal, totally legal how Hitler reached power (at least by the letter). And: 33% of the people are a big part of the nation. So, the NSDAP had big support even 1932 in the country. That is fact, as sad it is.
The biggest single party in today's Germany had 2009 also only ~33% of the votes, and where building a government with an other party. In 1949 it had even only 31% of the votes and formed the government together with two other parties.
You are right with Papen of course. He was from the Centre (Zentrum) party. The big parties rejected to form a government with the NSDAP, because it was no democratic party. But Papen changed that and formed an evil coalition, where the Zentrum literally supported the devil.
Apropos science: the EU decided, that in the future, costs of the military will now be accounted for in the same category as investments into science, universities or infrastructure. Thus, countries of the EU can put more money into weapons without missing the EU targets for investments into the future. Sometimes politics can just be a totally dirty business.
Of course, Hitler only could seize power, because the other parties where in controversy and the whole country political unstable. But you also have to keep in mind, that huge parts of the population where no friends of Democracy and wanted to have the Kaiser back.
Also: As much I know, even in those time, it was not possible for the population to directly elect the chancellor. The chancellor was "appointed" by the president. The precondition was, that he had a sufficient support in the Reichstag. That was the case in 1933, because other parties allied with the NSDAP. That is rather similar, how today the government is formed. In Germany, seldom one party can rule the country alone, even today when we have very much less parties in the Bundestag.
The problem is, that we are so far away from all that, that we think, we are immune to such things ... but we are not. Because humans are essentially the same today as yesterday. The only thing we could/should do is, remember what happened in the past. But we do the opposite: We make unnatural beasts of those people, that existed in the past -- some fairy-tale like creatures, that existed only in a nightmare of humanity.
But it was no nightmare and it can come back to us very quickly. Look into the nearer past -- what happened even in the "peaceful" Europe (e.g. Yugoslavia) -- humans can easily be beasts again and much easier, when we think, that it all was a fairy-tale.
Or you are lucky and start at the right place (e.g. you download Python and start with a Python tutorial) ... but when you started with Windows, you might be out of luck, if you did not find some cheap way to access one of the powerful IDEs in existence (many are still very expensive or/and need that you read the same amount of tuts).
Has a totalitarian state always to come with a crazy person? How about a group of people, how about a system, where you don't see "one big dictator"?
The people in the 30s also did not foresee another big dictator rising. Other parties in Germany for example thought, they could "tame" Hitler.
Maybe not in the traditional form (with religious meaning), but in a new, nationalistic form. The pretence of a higher purpose of the NS system was in my opinion, that the nation will succeed in its god given plan to succeed. You can hear it shining threw in many of Hitlers speeches.
No, when you understand "purpose" in a strict religious way, it did not have such pretence. But when you have an open mind to something that is more common than religion, it definitively had.
There are also many things that are clearly directed into a cult or replacement-religion. Also Hitler uses many religious phrases and imitations. Many see this as a clear sign for a cult.
Also the fact, that for example the wife of Goebbels killed her children, speaks clearly that many people (many killed themselves either) lost all hope and life purpose, because the NS system was (for them) something like the salvation for the German nation.
>The entire German political system became a suicide and death cult, and swallowed itself whole.
Now you say it yourself and contradict yourself by saying that it became a cult. It was a kind of cult and thus had the pretence of a higher purpose. (of course, if you always define "purpose" as going to heaven, you are right -- but in my opinion there are different levels or kinds of purpose).
That is right. But this was possible, because with the dead of the system, many of the involved people also lost hope for Germany as a whole. I don't want to excuse, what they did (some of them slaughtered their own people and behaved like real monsters), but in some cases it might become a little more understandable.
I also don't want to show this cult in a shiny light. It was really a death cult (and that from the start) -- but because of a different reason: The system was based on the notion, that the German nation will rise -- and the condition for that was, that others had to fall. It was a kind of social-darwinism (hope, got that word right). This whole notion: I will rise, and others have to fall (for that) is anti-christian and a total abuse of Darwins findings. It is a cult, based on the death of others. What happened was, that this death fired back on the Germans.
What he writes, does not imply that he is pro-totalitarianism. He only says, that the concept to give people something to hope for, to fight for, to give their life for a "higher meaning" is a more sound psychological concept as "hey, have a good time ... and just live for the next gadget"
Why do you think, the catholic church survived for 2000 years -- that is longer than the US capitalism currently lived.
Somebody asked, why this document is so high up-voted. I would say, we can't up-vote it enough, when we have the chance to learn from history and especially from the dark sides of history and from people like George Orwell.
Chance is very big, that a new era of darkness could fall on humanity, if we don't stop it at the right time (and nobody knows, when the chance is over).
Operator overloading is something, that belongs to the 'pro' skill-set of C++ developers and done wrong, can lead to many problems.
In Python it is much easier to overwrite the behavior of such standard methods and the language core can be learned in about 1/4 of the time you need to learn in C++ to just know the basics (C core, C++ object basics, Operator overloading, standard library basics like the string class, ...) -- in Python you get the power with much less learning effort and without the technical troubles.