497 karma · joined July 9, 2010
My eldest is 8 years old. He knows the basics of computer programming already, but he taught it to himself. Where we are native English speakers, he reads and speaks German without an accent. He also understands some French and a smattering of other languages. He reads at a 10 year old reading level, and has mathematics skills at the same level. His writing level is a bit lower. He is also one of the most affable children in his class, known and loved by all, and is generally thought of as conducting himself well, better than many of his peers. He has a solid grasp of the solar system and the fundamentals of astronomy; last year he found the four Galilean moons of Jupiter himself. On his own, he built his own electronics switch when he was barely six and still plays with electronics. He also has recently finished reading about WW1 and WW2, touching upon the Russian Revolution and the Great Depression along the way. And these were not little kid readings. He read "Im Westen nichts neues" - the German original of "All Quiet on the Western Front" - as well as "The Diary of Anne Frank" and several other works from various angles. I am already getting books for him out of the local university library. I say all this to illustrate that he is pretty far ahead of the game in many ways, and he has enjoyed all of it.
Now this is the tack that we have taken. First, we are big fans of the Mozart Effect on children. So we played Mozart a LOT when he was in utero and when he was a baby. We tended to play one of the major composers (Mozart, Beethoven, Bach) more often than other types of music until he was seven. We took to heart Hitler's observation about the importance the influences up to seven play. Therefore, we specifically kept from him any music that came out prior to about 1965. After that point, the lyrics and music start to become more complicated as protests and the civil strife of the time enter the music and then become "free love" and all that. We will now let him hear some of that, but not until he had a foundation from which to understand it.
One of our major guiding principles is to avoid something that might be abusive. "Abusive" is here defined as allowing something to enter your child's world for which s/he has no or very little framework for understanding it. So we were at pains to give him a framework and help him understand things in life as he encountered them early on.
Finally, we try our best not to say "no" when he wants to explore something. Rather, we do our best to find a way that he can safely delve in. For example, he found out the sixth graders at school were studying WW2. He wanted to learn, too, but the school wouldn't let him because he was in third grade. He approached me, and I cobbled together a reading list and a list of films that he could use to work through WW2. As WW2 makes no sense without WW1, he started there. So the point here is to never, ever, EVER limit your child but to take their curiosity as an invitation to find a way to help them interact with the world in a safe way.
We started playing and speaking French with him when he was two. When he was three, he caught a whiff of German and decided that he would rather learn German than French, so we switched (I speak both). We used Early Advantage's Muzzy program and cannot recommend it enough. It is an award-winning program that was developed by the BBC for teaching foreign languages to children. Combined with doing it at home, we also sought out speakers of the target language to help him learn. Today, my son reads full length novels in German and is yet to watch Apollo 13 in English. When I ask him what they said on Apollo 13, his first reply is "Houston, wir haben ein Problem!"
Finally, we encourage his learning to fight and staying physically fit through judo. This has helped a lot, and my son has consequently taken to reading Sun Tzu and thinking about strategy.
So, to sum it up, don't worry about tech. If you take care of the building blocks of logic and language and foster your child's natural desire to explore, there is no end to what they will do and where they will go.
FWIW, I wouldn't touch PayPal with a barge pole. We use RBS WorldPay because 1. we get favourable terms as we have an account with RBS, 2. we get 1% transaction costs with no monthly fees,and 3. we get fraud protection by RBS WorldPay for free.
The tech folk at RBSWP are not the sharpest tools in the shed, but RBSWP itself has proven to be good for us financially. Another one that is quite popular but whose breadth of availability I do not know is SagePay.
Psychological studies have been done that people who pay for something - anything at any price - always look more favourably on it than those who do not. One such study involved payment to see a film. Those who paid their own way ALWAYS had more favourable reviews of the film than those who were provided with a ticket for free.
Obviously, there is a limit to the psychology, but I wonder how much the feelings of a class' attendees can viably count toward evaluating the value of the workshop. Price is naturally where the willingness of the buyer to buy meets the willingness of the seller to sell, so the price of the workshop is beyond dispute in a free market context. But there are limits to what is rational, and I suspect there will be a significant percentage who will feel the workshop to be worth it merely because they paid a grand to be there. This "prestige" factor, after all, is one of the main components of a premium pricing plan.
For perspective, we had a marketing workshop here in Edinburgh that basically offered intensive, MBA-level instruction on marketing. It was taught by a former head of marketing for a major North American firm who had buckets of experience and now has his own major marketing consultancy here in the UK. Around a dozen of us worked with him for 8 workshops and had three extended consultations with him about our particular business circumstance. The cost to the company? £750 ($1200 USD at current exchange) for the first person, £500 ($800 USD) for each additional. Consequently, unless these three amigos are going to ensure the success of every company who signs up, I fail to see how a price tag of $1000 is justified.
Self-publishing naturally boosts the ROI on small runs, but it is not without its drawbacks. Whenever I have thought of a book that I might self-publish, I question whether it is worth writing. The major publishers know their customer better than I could realistically hope to ever know. If they would not take it on, one must wonder about the market for it. I do not say this to mean one should not self-publish, but self-publishing is usually reserved for pet projects that one has developed as a hobby and want to share. If one is looking for a high ROI on the effort it takes to write a book, the larger publishers are the way to go.
Also, the longevity of one's work is directly related to how evergreen the content is. If one writes something sexy or novel, I suspect one would be lucky to get a year or two of decent sales out of it. I write as evergreen as I can. so to this day, I am still receiving cheques from a book that I published 4-5 years ago that are close to the same level as what I received originally. It remains in the top 3% on Amazon.com. This is highly unusual, but it can be done. You will seldom get rich off a single title, but you can develop several streams of passive income if you write well and can engage readers. My 2¢, fwiw.
http://python.org/about/success/
http://python.about.com/od/gettingstarted/ss/whatispython_3....
I'd say your prof is pretty myopic.
Of the success stories, I particularly like this email about Python on NYSE from 2003:
http://code.activestate.com/lists/python-list/%3COF78FB9C74....
https://danpetre.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/kevin-lane-kell...
On a certain level, this is true. It depends on how you define 'god' as a concept.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-cla...
As for Google, they have gone past their prime. As the other comments note, 2008 was the peak. Yahoo is in the midst of what may be the longest running identity crisis ever to hit a company. And the name of the game for both Google and Bing is to keep you on their site with their advertisements for as long as they possibly can. Like some tentacled monster, they don't want to just serve you and let you go. The cheap tricks masquerading as a flashy UI ruin the user experience and make me not want to go back. Duck Duck Go actually keeps you coming by serving salient information (aka 'value') and then lets you get on with life. Kinda reminds me of the difference between the personality ethic and the character ethic from Covey's 7HHEP.
This was a great post. Thanks for putting it forward.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say that they don't crack it on the first go. So what? The password has to be in RAM every time the machine starts. AFAIK (and I would be pleased to be wrong about this), nobody shreds data on the hard drive because the user gets their password wrong. So, said bad guys can try to their heart's content.
As far as I'm concerned, it is a major hole in any argument for full-disk encryption.
"At the 2003 meeting of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, two-thirds of the 350 divorce lawyers who attended said the Internet played a significant role in divorces in the past year, with excessive interest in online porn contributing to more than half of such cases. "
So two-thirds of divorce lawyers say the Internet played a role, but porn was involved in "more than half" of those. The article is silent on how much more than half.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9876060-38.html
The paper referenced is available at:
http://citp.princeton.edu/pub/coldboot.pdf
From that paper, the most salient sentence for this discussion is:
"On all of our sample DRAMs, the decay rates were low enough that an attacker who cut power for 60 seconds would recover 99.9% of bits correctly."
The long and short is that your password has to be in RAM at some point in order to be matched against what is typed in. RAM decays slowly after a machine has been switched off. As the research shows, one can use a widely-available can of air to make that decay happen even slower. In the process, one can pull the value out of RAM.
Note that this is a hardware problem that no software on the market has been able to address. To do so, you would have to be able to validate x against y without having the value of y ever enter RAM.
Consequently, a reasonably good tech thief can read the password out of RAM. For the not-so-good tech thief, using passwords and social engineering tricks like being nice to someone and then asking them to watch your stuff for a moment will probably do the trick. I tend to see the various implementations of full-disk encryption as more for peace of mind and mitigation of liability than real security.
"Concern about Luxembourg's banking secrecy laws, and its reputation as a tax haven, led in April 2009 to it being added to a "grey list" of nations with questionable banking arrangements by the G20." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Luxembourg#Banking]
So, in effect, Paypal is probably a bank in nominal terms only. They can still do pretty much whatever they want with your money and get away with it. That is why my company went with WorldPay even when we started out. We don't get charged any fees, just commission, and we get free fraud insurance on the major credit cards.
For the OP, I would also recommend "Blue Ocean Strategy": http://amzn.com/1591396190 . The authors address how to move beyond mere competition, and pricing is one of those ways.
Can you give examples of this?
The extent of your liability will depend on where you live (the UK is harsher on developer responsibilities, IMO). IANAL, but I have worked as both sole trader and company director. Incorporation is dirt cheap compared to the cost of liability.
> you suggested that spending a larger fraction of gdp on healthcare was a bad thing.
I was probably in a rush when I wrote 'do more' and so apologise for any confusion. My meaning was not communicated well. If the data say anything, it is that the way the money is spent counts more than how much money is spent. That being said, getting the medical establishment and Big Pharma to take a pay cut is a Herculean task.
> "military spending" is the typical reply
I suppose for some it is, and the US does spend plenty on war. But I would agree with what I understand as your underlying point: The money needs to be spent better before more money is spent on anything.
Maybe I am missing something, but this should mean that the US can afford to do more. No?
>No, military spending doesn't account for the difference.
I didn't say anything about military spending. Where is that coming from?
As for poverty in the US, 1 in 8 are in poverty if you use the CIA-polished statistics. I say CIA-polished because the CIA also says the US spends 12.5% of its GDP on healthcare. According to the OECD, it is more like 15.3%. By comparison, France (top healthcare in the world according to the WHO) spends around 9.5% or so. Canada, number 6 in the world, spends something similar, around 9.7%. The UK, which is somewhere around 20th on the WHO rankings, spends 6.25%. For its 12.5%/15.3%, the US ranks 33rd - just above Cuba.
As for saving up for children's college, university educations are an increasingly well-known bubble in the US. It is not uncommon to have 70 or even many more students packed into a single auditorium for lectures. Even in advanced degrees, there is not as much small group or singular education as there is in Europe. But the costs are nevertheless huge. If I recall correctly, American University in DC currently tops the charts with tuition at $50k per year. That is tuition ONLY. It does not include, books, dorm, clothes, etc. A four-year degree thus has a base cost of $200k. It is nothing anymore for universities to charge $25-30k per year just for tuition. Given that this is the case at a time when many people are losing their houses because they can't make the payments and others can't get on the property ladder because they can't afford the down payment, I would say it is damn hard in the US to pay for things that people in Sweden take for granted.
Just my 2¢. YMMV.