I hate posting links about broadly discussed topics. I thought hard about the latest discussion1 around Jeff Atwood's post and I still had something to say, so here it is.
To those who argue programming is an essential skill we should be teaching our children, right up there with reading, writing, and arithmetic: can you explain to me how Michael Bloomberg would be better at his day to day job of leading the largest city in the USA if he woke up one morning as a crack Java coder?
From In the Pipeline:
The biggest stinker I have run across. . .Imagine 6 skunks wrapped in rubber innertubes and the whole thing is set ablaze. That might approach the metaphysical stench of this material.
Also known as things I have regrettably worked with. Every step of the chemistry sucked. Luckily, I spent so much time in lab, no one ever noticed that my skin and hair stunk for a couple of months.
American Prometheus is the biography of American scientist Robert Openheimer. It's a wonderful and sad story of a passionate person caught in the machinations of lesser men.
I listened to the 26 hour audio book which is tolerable but not great. As an unabridged audio book it is complete but somewhat disjointed. It was compeling and fascinating none the less.
I can recommend this book to anyone that has the slightest interest or enjoyment of any of the following topics:
Another good post over at In The Pipeline. This one examines claims about people holding advanced degrees needing assistance. Derek Lowe does his normal excellent work and debunks some of the conclusions.
Looking at advanced degrees as a percentage of the population, we have 4.3% in 1970, 7.2% in 1980, 8.8% in 1990, 8.6% in 2000 (a decrease I'm at a loss to explain), and 10.6% in 2009.
I agree with his scepticism.
Derek Lowe discussing a NYT article making the case for allowing comments on scientific publications and archiving them for posterity.
. . .the comments section of any engaging article is almost as necessary a read as the piece itself — if you want to know how insider experts received the article and how those outsiders processed the news (and maybe to enjoy some nasty snark from the trolls).
—Jack Hitt
Here's a sane look at some of the recent headlines about the mortality of sitting.
I find it interesting how many people will gravitate towards studies and conclusions that support their own preconceived bias. Extrapolation of data has its limits.
Using some of the logic I have encountered recently, I have six conclusions about these studies:
Standing Desks are healthier than traditional desks Lying Down Desks are healthier than traditional desks Swimming Desks are healthier than traditional desks Hyperbolic Chamber Desks1 are healthier than traditional desks Drinking Desks are healthier than traditional desks Sitting under your desk reading mortality studies is healthier than traditional desks If you are a guy looking for something to fret about, here's something with a much better set of studies to support extrapolation.
I'd probably do some crazy stuff too if it was me or my family. I'm not sure I would take a bleaching agent.
You know what makes me skeptical about a research project? A press release.
From the Economist, Michael J. Fox's charity has spent $289M on research. Or at least they have given that much money to organizations that do research.1
That's not cynisim. I'm just trying to be exact. There's always administrative overhead that does not count as pure research. ↩
Rather than go on a rant about how much agree with this link, I'll just leave this comment:
I will not encourage my daughter to follow the same path I did and go into the physical sciences.
