Then what does your question mean?
The Internet is a "university equivalent" according to our hero.
And the three bears lived happily ever after.
An example of the benefit of schooling, vs. teaching one's self through free materials:
I never went to Japanese school. I did take private lessons for a period of time my second year here, but that's about as close to formal education as I got. Now, I speak Japanese, and I speak it at a business level. Other than the previously mentioned lessons I took, all education was done by me using books and asking questions to those around me. I got the JLPT level 2 a couple of years ago.
I've met people who have been here much shorter than I, but went to a proper Japanese school, that know more kanji than I, and sometimes when getting into conversations in which I am unfamiliar on the topic, they have a better vocabulary than I. I can pick up what I need to know quick enough, but they got that information in the first place by dedicating themselves full-time to learning the language. On top of this, they have something they can substantially present to employers when looking for a job - they went to XXX Japanese school for X months/years, and they got JLPT level X. I don't have that. I can say 'I speak Japanese'. The reason I got level 2 was so that I could qualify my knowledge if/when looking for work. Without that, I would have nothing, other than a claim that I can speak Japanese.
I used to work in HR in my old company, for almost 2 years. Part of my job was to hire English staff. I went through a million resumes. Which do you think gave me more information (thereby making the applicant more appealing):
1) I went to XXX Japanese school for X months/years, and got JLPT level X
2) I speak Japanese at a business level
The first one gives quantifiable data, with a standard to give a level that the applicant has achieved. The second one gives a non-quantifiable piece of data that doesn't provide any accurate way to guage where the applicant's level is at.
Now imagine I was hiring for a translation job. Which of these two do you think I would call in for an interview, and which do you think I would toss in the garbage?
Now imagine someone hunting for an IT job.
Applicant one's resume: I went to XXX university and graduated with a degree in Computer science.
Applicant two's resume: I have studied online, watching a whole lot of youtube videos, and talking with people in the field, trying to increase my knowledge as much as possible.
Again, which applicant is going to be called for an interview, and which is going to be skipped over?
Of course, with the last example, there could be a third example:
Applicant three's resume: I have 10 years experience in the IT field, working with [insert technology here] daily, as well as developing [insert something] for [insert some technology] which was used by [insert something that sounds good]
Now this person is in a much better position, as they have real, practical experience in the field. As long as the company doesn't have a 'only degree holders' stance, the person is a candidate for the job. BUT, that person had to find someone willing to hire them at the start, when they didn't have that practial experience. And that brings us back to the first two people.
So to get back to your original point, depending on the field, a degree isn't necessary. But more often than not, it's going to dramatically increase the odds of getting hired.
My beef is that the price of attending a university will eventually become unaffordable because supply and demand. That's why the price in America is sky rocketing. That why I said to you that you can not think in a vacuum.
If the employer is not lazy there is plenty of option to gain the suitable candidate.
Last edited by LinuxFun; 2011-05-20 at 05:47 PM.
What does that have to do with any of the post you quoted?
By ignoring it altogether and posting on something else altogether?
I replied by saying the the price of university will become unaffordable in the near future. so that is why I started this thread.
What country are you speaking of? A cheap home where I'm from is still more than $100 000, and that's a REALLY cheap home. I've never heard of anyone having a student loan more than that.
Now I agree that it sucks that young people have these huge student loans. But let's be realistic here - if you are going to Harvard, your school fees will be ridiculous. But there are a lot of smaller cheaper universities out there that aren't going to cost anything near that. I came out of uni with like $8000 in loans. Add the money I received from my folks over my school years, and it cost maybe around $14000. Of course I had living expenses and whatnot, but I worked while in Uni to cover that.
$80,000-100,00 is not ivory league. In America student loan is larger then the entire credit card debt. The same thing that caused the real-estate market to crash, is now happening to the student loan sector.
Community college is very valuable. But it is only 2 years.
"Am I Calm? I am f***ing ZEN!"
I came out of Uni with less than $10000 in student loans. I also worked my way through university though.
Someone pointed out about your problem with english
but how can you call
Ivy league... an ivory league.
America is a continent, not a country.
Last edited by TkSh; 2011-05-21 at 04:31 AM.
The Americas refers to the New World in a continental sense.
Complaining about the US' appropriation of the continental term as a nickname for the country is silly, and peevish.
Lots of Canadians do the same sort of thing. We call them doughnut munchers.
But another point you raised is a much more important one:
if the OP really is an American, and referred to the Ivy League as the ivory league, then the only thing that will ever help him get ahead is an intensive remedial course in English.
I am starting to doubt he is an American, or rather that English is his first language.
Without substantial cognitive impairment, there is simply no way a native speaker could be as cretinous as he.
Oh damn, why did I come back home early....
Is there a possibility for a decentralize approach that uses professionals and professors as mentors and the free academic material online to help a person develop their skill to a profession level, which can be govern by a opensource like community?
Not if someone wants a job where a degree is required.
Linux, I think the best thing you can do is to play Pachinko or simillar games or just scratch a Lotto and wait for the Jackpot. Then you can go to a University and not risking lifetime debt marathon. LOL ...
Last edited by LinuxFun; 2011-05-22 at 03:33 PM.
Detail is important here.
I went to Canterbury once and my dad pointed out a ducking stool where witches were unceremoniously "Ducked" and often killed. These witches aren't the customary black hatted wenches we know and love from Macbeth, they were normal people with rare gifts that people misunderstood.
People fear what they do not understand. Agreed, occasionally, with great knowledge it is often used unwisely though, as I have pointed out.
Have you got a degree yet or are you still trolling the open source forums?
Coincidentally, what you describe as a peer-like environment for study etc... that is the haven for the LAMP recluse, is also similar to a PhD. (Or so I am reliably informed by one of the more uniquely sociable quantitative analysts).
"Am I Calm? I am f***ing ZEN!"
Last edited by LinuxFun; 2011-05-23 at 03:35 PM.
Saying Derivatives is to blame for the meltdown is like saying a football team just won the English Premier League, but that none of the individual players involved were responsible for the victory.
What we really need is some big boiling pots of oil, some of these fancy ducking chairs, and a bunch of bankers.
It's not like most of you are worth the time of day, anyways. Have you ever tried to have an intelligent conversation with a banker in Japan about anything but which froofy Cartier watch he plans to buy next???
I have. You're morons. It doesn't work.
People that reap but don't produce should be killed.
It's not like there's a shortage of scum.