So several people in this thread have talked about academia giving you a network, and getting jobs via that, but have also conflated that with companies only hiring from particular schools.
The network of contacts you make through university and your careers is a mechanism by which you hear about jobs you might otherwise never get the chance to apply for. That’s a very real thing, but will tend to be dominated by contacts you make after university as your career progresses.
The other thing of needed a degree from a particular university, or a PhD, isn’t so much about a network as that degree being a shibboleth. The person reading your job application sees that and knows there are questions they don’t need to ask.
These are both things you can, and may need to, work around if you go down the self taught route. Depending on the work you want to do you may need to make sure you do work which either you can point to or other people will see so that you hear about those jobs, or get a referral to avoid the normal job requirements.
> you might otherwise never get the chance to apply for
It kind of reminds me of the whole "luck is not a strategy, but increasing your number of attempts is". Having a network increases the number of chances you have to get lucky. I have a friend that joined a work softball league, and that network eventually led him to a role with another company participating in the league.
I think Gavin Bierman is an unsung hero as far as steering the Java language is concerned. I had the privilege to sit next to him in the office when I was working on TruffleRuby, and our conversations on language design were always elucidating, and his ability to gently steer others away from pitfalls was something I wish I could do as well.
Hearing the work he and others did to gradually introduce pattern matching without painting themselves into a corner was fascinating and inspiring.
C64 BASIC was bad compared to BASIC on the Spectrum, and terrible compared to BBC BASIC on the Acorn machines. Sure, you could POKE your way to doing everything, but compared to having OS routines for most things, and an assembler accessible from BASIC it was hard work.
Commodore BASIC was pretty bad because Tramiel had bought a permanent license to Microsoft BASIC back in 1977, for the PET, and saw no reason to upgrade for the VIC or 64.
You seem to be conflating life, multicellular life, and intelligent life. Life appears to have developed on Earth pretty quickly, multicellular life took a long time to appear, and we are only aware of one species that developed civilisation building capabilities.
Life might be very common, but intelligent life still be incrediblY rare.
It depends what you mean by "civilization building". I think we gloss over that a bit too much. We're not the largest population, not the largest total mass, not the only one that builds large structures. We're the only one that sent stuff outside of Earth, yes, and a few other things. But discussing the definition is itself interesting
Human civilisation means intelligence and memory are collective, externalised, persistent, communicable. There's also a layer of symbolic abstraction (science and math) which makes it possible to predict useful consequences with some precision.
Individuals die but their inventions and insights remain. Individuals can also specialise, which is a kind of civilisational divide and conquer strategy.
Most animals don't have that. Some do train their young to a limited extent, but without writing the knowledge doesn't persist. And without abstraction it only evolves extremely slowly, if at all.
They have to reinvent the wheel over and over, which means they never invent the wheel at all.
We actually have this problem with politics and relationships. We keep making the same mistakes because the humanities provide some limited memory, but there's no symbolic abstraction and prediction - just story telling, which is far less effective.
Bonus points: I often wonder if there's a level of complexity beyond our kind of intelligence, and what it might look like. Abstraction of abstraction would be meta-learning - symbolic systems that manipulate the creation and distribution of civilisational learning.
AI seems to be heading in that direction.
There may be further levels, but we can't imagine them. We could be embedded in them and we wouldn't see them for what they are.
The only similar example I can think of is when, roughly 2400 million years ago (during the Paleoproterozoic iirc), the ancestors of cyanobacteria poisoned their atmosphere by overproducing oxygen which resulted in an extinction event. But that whole process still took somewhere in the order of millions of years to complete I believe.
> But that whole process still took somewhere in the order of millions of years to complete I believe.
The geological evidence is that that oxygen build-up first had to exhaust things that took the reactive oxygen out of the air and water. Iron oxide was laid down as huge deposits of "banded iron ore" The great rust. (1)
This is hard to get an exact number on, but as far as I know, it is estimated to have taken at least 500 million years.
And then oxygen increased again, a billion years later (2)
It was not fast. It was measured in 100 million year ticks.
>we are only aware of one species that developed civilization building capabilities.
well, the first one just doesn't leave any chance for any other one.
>Life might be very common, but intelligent life still be incrediblY rare.
the time period between big ape and nuclear bomb is extremely short - few millions years. In a hundred or a thousand - doesn't really matter - years we'll be an interstellar species or may be we destroy ourselves by Covid-2319. The point is that complexity develops exponentially and tremendous changes are happening in an extremely a short period of time - i.e. if life has 4B years to develop when it most probably has 4.01B years to develop civilization.
Unlikely we will ever be interstellar. The technology involved is speculative and the physics barriers needed to be surpassed are impossible and not well understood.
To reach another star by the laws of physics involves many human lifetimes and that’s just the nearest star.
That in itself makes it more likely that we will never be interstellar.
Slow but plausible starships can be designed with 1960s technology. The obstacle is not the technology but the scale of the effort, a problem that could be solved by extension of civilization into the solar system with much larger populations.
Humanity will never put effort into this. We don’t have the technology yet but yes we can develop it but doing this is harder than building a bridge across the ocean between Asia and the US.
That bridge is also within our technological capacity. But it’s not happening period.
That depends on the scale of human society, doesn't it? Grow the population in the solar system enough and it becomes a smaller fraction of gross output than many trivial and frivolous things are today.
I'm arguing here that if non-interstellar space colonization is possible, interstellar colonization is a natural and feasible extension. You might argue that even colonization in the solar system will not occur, and I admit that's a defensible position.
>The technology involved is speculative and the physics barriers needed to be surpassed are impossible and not well understood.
we can build with today's tech - classic nuclear reactor plus ion drive - a 3 stage ship reaching 1000km/s, 1200 years to the closest star. Once we get to fusion, we'll be able to improve that speed a small order of magnitude.
>To reach another star by the laws of physics involves many human lifetimes and that’s just the nearest star.
>That in itself makes it more likely that we will never be interstellar.
That is exactly what makes it _inter_stellar:) We'll have generations - 10-15 to the nearest star with the current tech mentioned above - of people living their lives on those ships. Living on a planet will become a strange thing for them.
I think in 10-20 years, once launching into LEO becomes cheap with Starship, companies, universities and wealthy individuals will be launching solar + ion drive and nuclear + ion to all the places in the Solar System and some automated probes - beyond.
Intelligent life most like arose from the extinction level events that wiped out less intelligent super predators. This gave those who are far weaker but with higher brain capacity the chance to express their genetic variations.
Then tried Little, Big by John Crowley and the relationships were probably wrong. I mean, Sylvia might be related to George Mouse, but probably should not have a family connection to Daily Alice.
Books were produced before computers, and with very good typesetting. One difference between websites and books is that theee is a feedback loop with books where somebody ia at looking at the layout and either adjusting the spacing subtly, or even editing the text to avoid problems. Sometimes this is just to ensure that left justified text isn’t too ragged on the right edge, sometimes it’s to avoid river of space rubbing through a paragraph, and sometimes it’s editing or typesetting to avoid orphans.
But text on a page is set for a set layout, and that’s where the web really differs.
That’s how I started as well. Much nicer to program than the spectrum, and taught me about parsing in the worst way when I discovered my text adventure couldn’t have a variable called torch because it was. Parsed as to rch.
> and taught me about parsing in the worst way when I discovered my text adventure couldn’t have a variable called torch because it was. Parsed as to rch.
That may have very little to do with refresh rate itself, and far more to do with the image processing and latency introduced by the monitor in different video modes.
Ah yes, that was always entertaining. All the different ways additional metadata could be encoded was so much fun if you were dealing with geographical data.
The network of contacts you make through university and your careers is a mechanism by which you hear about jobs you might otherwise never get the chance to apply for. That’s a very real thing, but will tend to be dominated by contacts you make after university as your career progresses.
The other thing of needed a degree from a particular university, or a PhD, isn’t so much about a network as that degree being a shibboleth. The person reading your job application sees that and knows there are questions they don’t need to ask.
These are both things you can, and may need to, work around if you go down the self taught route. Depending on the work you want to do you may need to make sure you do work which either you can point to or other people will see so that you hear about those jobs, or get a referral to avoid the normal job requirements.
reply