If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).

--
Copyright 2021 WIJ

On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
>
> --
> Copyright 2021 WIJ

In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"

On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> >
> > --
> > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"

Copyright is different on circumstances
https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en

To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > >
> > > --
> > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> Copyright is different on circumstances
> https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
>
> To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.

Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?

If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.

On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> >
> > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
>

I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.

> If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.

What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > >
> > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> >
> I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.

It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.

An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.

On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 00:35:36 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > > >
> > > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> > >
> > I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> > understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> > What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.
> It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.
>
> An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.

We are only interested in FACT, or whether a proposition is true or not.
Losers often make it complicated, cheaters make it more so.

As to how serious research efforts were taken is irrelevant.
As to fairness, Nature is always fair. Taking advantage of unfairness is
often how a breakthrough built from (I am not saying unfairness is blindly right).
Ethical rules are something more vague as they are, also not much related.
(e.g. Alan Turing is a gay is irrelevant, the same whether or not Einstein rape-holic
or someone's saint behavior, characteristic, etc.)

On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:08:31 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 00:35:36 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > > > >
> > > > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > > > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> > > >
> > > I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> > > understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > > > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> > > What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.
> > It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.
> >
> > An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.
> We are only interested in FACT, or whether a proposition is true or not.
> Losers often make it complicated, cheaters make it more so.
>
> As to how serious research efforts were taken is irrelevant.
> As to fairness, Nature is always fair. Taking advantage of unfairness is
> often how a breakthrough built from (I am not saying unfairness is blindly right).
> Ethical rules are something more vague as they are, also not much related..
> (e.g. Alan Turing is a gay is irrelevant, the same whether or not Einstein rape-holic
> or someone's saint behavior, characteristic, etc.)

To me a loser is just someone who is having trouble competing properly at an important task. I don't like the term loser. Why not just call such a person "someone in need of educational or other help?"

It may be true that sometimes, taking advantage of unfairness (e.g., stealing the USA from Native Americans, stealing much of the African economy centuries ago) leads to something resembling progress. It is generally not at all the best way though, and it comes at a cost. Future generations of very smart and perceptive Americans have always remembered how our country was founded. Failure to treat Native Americans well (this can be generalized) leads to weakened strength of US moral authority and more. Either some highly intelligent people keep track of big debts or they don't.

It is true that facts are important.

Why do you refer to Einstein as "rape-holic?" I didn't think Einstein was perfect, but he's almost as good as Alan Turing to me.

On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 21:29:52 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:08:31 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 00:35:36 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > > > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > > > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > > > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > > > > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> > > > >
> > > > I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> > > > understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > > > > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> > > > What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.
> > > It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.
> > >
> > > An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.
> > We are only interested in FACT, or whether a proposition is true or not..
> > Losers often make it complicated, cheaters make it more so.
> >
> > As to how serious research efforts were taken is irrelevant.
> > As to fairness, Nature is always fair. Taking advantage of unfairness is
> > often how a breakthrough built from (I am not saying unfairness is blindly right).
> > Ethical rules are something more vague as they are, also not much related.
> > (e.g. Alan Turing is a gay is irrelevant, the same whether or not Einstein rape-holic
> > or someone's saint behavior, characteristic, etc.)
> To me a loser is just someone who is having trouble competing properly at an important task. I don't like the term loser. Why not just call such a person "someone in need of educational or other help?"
>

I imagine you refer to Donald Trump.

> It may be true that sometimes, taking advantage of unfairness (e.g., stealing the USA from Native Americans, stealing much of the African economy centuries ago) leads to something resembling progress. It is generally not at all the best way though, and it comes at a cost. Future generations of very smart and perceptive Americans have always remembered how our country was founded. Failure to treat Native Americans well (this can be generalized) leads to weakened strength of US moral authority and more. Either some highly intelligent people keep track of big debts or they don't.
>
> It is true that facts are important.
>

Yes, nearly everyone says "fact is important".
I feel like you were talking about communism, something (struggle) between
bourgeoisie (capitalist class) and proletarius (worker class). At least, the
structure of your argument is very similar.
But, I am not familiar with communism (or the way of your reasoning/construct).
Would you reveal more in detail for me?

> Why do you refer to Einstein as "rape-holic?" I didn't think Einstein was perfect, but he's almost as good as Alan Turing to me.

I mean whether Einstein is rape-holic is not much as important as the true
applicability of relativity in physics. We judge Alan Turing not by his moral/ethical feeling.

On Monday, June 7, 2021 at 7:54:30 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 21:29:52 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:08:31 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 00:35:36 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > > > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > > > > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > > > > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > > > > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > > > > > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> > > > > >
> > > > > I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> > > > > understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > > > > > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> > > > > What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.
> > > > It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.
> > > >
> > > > An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.
> > > We are only interested in FACT, or whether a proposition is true or not.
> > > Losers often make it complicated, cheaters make it more so.
> > >
> > > As to how serious research efforts were taken is irrelevant.
> > > As to fairness, Nature is always fair. Taking advantage of unfairness is
> > > often how a breakthrough built from (I am not saying unfairness is blindly right).
> > > Ethical rules are something more vague as they are, also not much related.
> > > (e.g. Alan Turing is a gay is irrelevant, the same whether or not Einstein rape-holic
> > > or someone's saint behavior, characteristic, etc.)
> > To me a loser is just someone who is having trouble competing properly at an important task. I don't like the term loser. Why not just call such a person "someone in need of educational or other help?"
> >
> I imagine you refer to Donald Trump.

I do view Donald Trump as the worst president in US history, but that dishonor has become quite competitive in a sense lately. We've had many terrible political leaders in the USA. I don't think DJT is a "loser," because I view the term loser as imprecisely defined and not that awful. I view Donald Trump as a deeply damaging predator and advancer of racist and other toxic/evil ideologies.

> > It may be true that sometimes, taking advantage of unfairness (e.g., stealing the USA from Native Americans, stealing much of the African economy centuries ago) leads to something resembling progress. It is generally not at all the best way though, and it comes at a cost. Future generations of very smart and perceptive Americans have always remembered how our country was founded. Failure to treat Native Americans well (this can be generalized) leads to weakened strength of US moral authority and more. Either some highly intelligent people keep track of big debts or they don't.
> >
> > It is true that facts are important.
> >
> Yes, nearly everyone says "fact is important".
> I feel like you were talking about communism, something (struggle) between
> bourgeoisie (capitalist class) and proletarius (worker class). At least, the
> structure of your argument is very similar.
> But, I am not familiar with communism (or the way of your reasoning/construct).
> Would you reveal more in detail for me?

I don't know what argument structure you are referring to. I support liberal and fair capitalism. I do care about the challenges ethical people who are deficient in their privileges/rights or access to helpful resources are.. (I do not think that "fixing the education system" alone is enough to end discrimination, that was a mistaken belief I used to hold. The answer to that is mainly accountability...laws must be enforced in real life.) I don't mind discussing political things at great length, but no, I really am not out to praise Elizabeth Warren or any other political leaders that I view as fakers. Did you know that truly lying in any way for any reason is at a minimum a signal of high unpreparedness?

> > Why do you refer to Einstein as "rape-holic?" I didn't think Einstein was perfect, but he's almost as good as Alan Turing to me.
> I mean whether Einstein is rape-holic is not much as important as the true
> applicability of relativity in physics. We judge Alan Turing not by his moral/ethical feeling.

Maybe you don't. Alan Turing was highly ethical according to me. I have broken speed limit laws in the past.

On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 09:27:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> On Monday, June 7, 2021 at 7:54:30 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 21:29:52 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 10:08:31 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 00:35:36 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 11:30:00 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 22:59:29 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 8:23:54 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, 6 June 2021 at 19:31:57 UTC+8, DV wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 11:35:18 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > If a person proposes a copyright'ed proof that "N==NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > > > peer review. If he insists/posts long enough, eventually, 50% 'he' will be right.
> > > > > > > > > > So, I should propose(booking) a copyright'ed proof that "N!=NP" and ask for
> > > > > > > > > > peer review, and keep on insisting and posting, so long as the subject is not
> > > > > > > > > > sabotaged in the following 'revision', contents are much less important.
> > > > > > > > > > The key points are insisting and keep posting. Everything helpful from others will be in the list of acknowledge, finally. That is so far something I can read
> > > > > > > > > > and make sense out from olcott's posts, though some point worth further investigation(function prototype).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Copyright 2021 WIJ
> > > > > > > > > In what sense do you mean "copyrighted?"
> > > > > > > > Copyright is different on circumstances
> > > > > > > > https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239/what-is-copyright?hl=en
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To my understanding, any intellectual work is basically automatically
> > > > > > > > copyrighted including helper's work to each author in the Conversation.
> > > > > > > Ah OK. Are you suggesting criticisms of academic journals that do not work diligently to review proofs of important research problems?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > I referred olcott's posts to phenomenon of reward motivated proof, so that I can
> > > > > > understand all the 'few' posts I saw better and make my time seeing worthwhile.
> > > > > > > If so that is not absurd. In the US it is indeed very difficult to get serious research efforts taken seriously, unless you belong to the right collection of people. Unfortunately, membership in such collections often comes at a high ethical cost.
> > > > > > What is meant by 'ethical'? Dictionary says it relates to moral principles.
> > > > > It relates to a person following reasonable rules--typically ones that are fairly easy to follow--to cause this person to treat others fairly. Without such moral principles, any community or set of communities would deteriorate into a community of perpetually unsatisfied citizens who are generally fine with predatory conduct. Sometimes, it is OK for a citizen in a community to not care about good ethical rules (perhaps seeing them as stupid) but follow them anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > An ethical cost refers to a person engaging in conduct that puts that person in violation of ethical principles. This can be costly, since unrebuked violations of this sort it may weaken key ethical principles or damage the reputation of the culprit.
> > > > We are only interested in FACT, or whether a proposition is true or not.
> > > > Losers often make it complicated, cheaters make it more so.
> > > >
> > > > As to how serious research efforts were taken is irrelevant.
> > > > As to fairness, Nature is always fair. Taking advantage of unfairness is
> > > > often how a breakthrough built from (I am not saying unfairness is blindly right).
> > > > Ethical rules are something more vague as they are, also not much related.
> > > > (e.g. Alan Turing is a gay is irrelevant, the same whether or not Einstein rape-holic
> > > > or someone's saint behavior, characteristic, etc.)
> > > To me a loser is just someone who is having trouble competing properly at an important task. I don't like the term loser. Why not just call such a person "someone in need of educational or other help?"
> > >
> > I imagine you refer to Donald Trump.
> I do view Donald Trump as the worst president in US history, but that dishonor has become quite competitive in a sense lately. We've had many terrible political leaders in the USA. I don't think DJT is a "loser," because I view the term loser as imprecisely defined and not that awful. I view Donald Trump as a deeply damaging predator and advancer of racist and other toxic/evil ideologies.
> > > It may be true that sometimes, taking advantage of unfairness (e.g., stealing the USA from Native Americans, stealing much of the African economy centuries ago) leads to something resembling progress. It is generally not at all the best way though, and it comes at a cost. Future generations of very smart and perceptive Americans have always remembered how our country was founded. Failure to treat Native Americans well (this can be generalized) leads to weakened strength of US moral authority and more. Either some highly intelligent people keep track of big debts or they don't.

In reality, DJT's thought is 50% popular. Advocate cares the truth to them (short-sighted, lie, scheme,...,irrelevant).

> > >
> > > It is true that facts are important.
> > >
> > Yes, nearly everyone says "fact is important".
> > I feel like you were talking about communism, something (struggle) between
> > bourgeoisie (capitalist class) and proletarius (worker class). At least, the
> > structure of your argument is very similar.
> > But, I am not familiar with communism (or the way of your reasoning/construct).
> > Would you reveal more in detail for me?
> I don't know what argument structure you are referring to. I support liberal and fair capitalism. I do care about the challenges ethical people who are deficient in their privileges/rights or access to helpful resources are.. (I do not think that "fixing the education system" alone is enough to end discrimination, that was a mistaken belief I used to hold. The answer to that is mainly accountability...laws must be enforced in real life.) I don't mind discussing political things at great length, but no, I really am not out to praise Elizabeth Warren or any other political leaders that I view as fakers. Did you know that truly lying in any way for any reason is at a minimum a signal of high unpreparedness?

Yes, in a way lying may be an improvised(high unpreparedness) survival strategy.
The subject of the discussion perceived to me is basically all about politics,
government of people/resources, "from the perspective of a proletariat".

Definition of proletariat
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live

I think studying the whole thing about communism might help.

> > > Why do you refer to Einstein as "rape-holic?" I didn't think Einstein was perfect, but he's almost as good as Alan Turing to me.
> > I mean whether Einstein is rape-holic is not much as important as the true
> > applicability of relativity in physics. We judge Alan Turing not by his moral/ethical feeling.
> Maybe you don't. Alan Turing was highly ethical according to me. I have broken speed limit laws in the past.

I don't mix intellectual achievement with individual's ethical conduct or thought.

On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>
> Definition of proletariat
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
>
That definition ignores education and training.
19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
feature of the modern social structure.

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> >
> > Definition of proletariat
> > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> >
> That definition ignores education and training.
> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> feature of the modern social structure.

Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?

On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> > >
> > > Definition of proletariat
> > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> > >
> > That definition ignores education and training.
> > 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> > The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> > without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> > qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> > feature of the modern social structure.
> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>
I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.

I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Definition of proletariat
> > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > > > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> > > >
> > > That definition ignores education and training.
> > > 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> > > The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> > > without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> > > qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> > > feature of the modern social structure.
> > Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> >
> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>
> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.

I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.

It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.

What textbook did you write?

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:31:32 AM UTC-4, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Definition of proletariat
> > > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > > > > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> > > > >
> > > > That definition ignores education and training.
> > > > 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> > > > The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> > > > without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> > > > qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> > > > feature of the modern social structure.
> > > Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> > >
> > I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> > demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
> >
> > I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> > most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> > education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>
> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>
> What textbook did you write?

I meant to say "rely too heavily on university".

On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Definition of proletariat
> > > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > > > > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> > > > >
> > > > That definition ignores education and training.
> > > > 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> > > > The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> > > > without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> > > > qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> > > > feature of the modern social structure.
> > > Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> > >
> > I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> > demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
> >
> > I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> > most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> > education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>
A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
so it's an honest signal.
>
> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>
There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>
> What textbook did you write?
>
Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
to be a games programmer.
https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4

On 6/8/2021 12:44 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
>>>>>>
>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>>>>
>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>>>
>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>>
> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
> so it's an honest signal.
>>
>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>>
> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>>
>> What textbook did you write?
>>
> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
> to be a games programmer.
> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
>

I found it before you said which book it was.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Definition of proletariat
> > > > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> > > > > > 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> > > > > >
> > > > > That definition ignores education and training.
> > > > > 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> > > > > The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> > > > > without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> > > > > qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> > > > > feature of the modern social structure.
> > > > Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> > > >
> > > I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> > > demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
> > >
> > > I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> > > most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> > > education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
> > I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
> >
> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
> so it's an honest signal.
> >

I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?

> > It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
> >
> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
> >

Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i..e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.

I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.

> > What textbook did you write?
> >
> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
> to be a games programmer.
> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4

Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.

On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
>>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
>>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
>>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
>>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
>>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
>>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
>>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>>>>>
>>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
>>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
>>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
>>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
>>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>>>
>> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
>> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
>> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
>> so it's an honest signal.
>>>
>
> I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?
>
>>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>>>
>> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
>> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
>> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>>>
>
> Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.
>
> I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.
>
>>> What textbook did you write?
>>>
>> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
>> to be a games programmer.
>> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
>
> Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.
>

You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

On 6/8/2021 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4,
>>>> malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4,
>>>>>> malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
>>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
>>>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial
>>>>>>>> workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell
>>>>>>>> their labor to live
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
>>>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who
>>>>>>> learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
>>>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have
>>>>>>> qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
>>>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is
>>>>>>> valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
>>>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser
>>>>>>> qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
>>>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
>>>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped
>>>>>> self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would
>>>>> have an effect, but it's hard to
>>>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just
>>>>> assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a
>>>>> textbook can teach you a lot. However
>>>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the
>>>>> massive bills for private school
>>>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks
>>>>> from the web and read them.
>>>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how
>>>> to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and
>>>> other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a
>>>> mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding
>>>> students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition
>>>> of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less
>>>> competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on
>>>> some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>>>>
>>> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university
>>> degrees are mainly what is known in the
>>> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach
>>> anything. It just has to recruit students who
>>> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well,
>>> attendance at a university is hard to fake,
>>> so it's an honest signal.
>>>>
>>
>> I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal.  What do you
>> think the honest signal says?
>>
>>>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in
>>>> issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students'
>>>> skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim
>>>> can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that
>>>> claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else.
>>>> Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding
>>>> when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good
>>>> source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source
>>>> was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone
>>>> understands that, though.
>>>>
>>> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree
>>> certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
>>> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they
>>> offer competence for any particular job. And for
>>> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>>>>
>>
>> Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty
>> readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate).  I had to quit
>> working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully
>> able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't
>> find a job again anywhere.  I can't even get a serious email from a
>> computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview.  I think I'm
>> in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?)
>> educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure
>> I've been ghosted in a sense.  That was the only serious firm that
>> contacted me.
>>
>> I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a
>> job.  I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS
>> coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a
>> very good ability to learn new things.
>>
>>>> What textbook did you write?
>>>>
>>> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on
>>> graphics and audio programming because I used
>>> to be a games programmer.
>>> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
>>>
>>
>> Your book looks interesting to me.  I would probably think about
>> buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do.  I'm
>> actually quite fond of C++ development.
>>
>
> You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
> on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
2001

> creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
> I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.
>

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
> >>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> >>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
> >>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> >>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> >>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> >>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> >>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
> >>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> >>>>>
> >>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> >>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> >>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> >>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
> >>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
> >>>
> >> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
> >> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
> >> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
> >> so it's an honest signal.
> >>>
> >
> > I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?
> >
> >>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
> >>>
> >> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
> >> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
> >> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
> >>>
> >
> > Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.
> >
> > I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.
> >
> >>> What textbook did you write?
> >>>
> >> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
> >> to be a games programmer.
> >> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
> >
> > Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.
> >
> You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
> on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
> creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
> I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.
> --
> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
>
> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
> minds." Einstein

Yes, I've been programming in C++ since I was 12. I'm very familiar with C++ and have used it very frequently.

On 6/8/2021 1:40 PM, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
>>>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
>>>>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
>>>>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
>>>>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
>>>>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
>>>>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
>>>>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
>>>>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
>>>>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
>>>>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
>>>>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
>>>>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>>>>>
>>>> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
>>>> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
>>>> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
>>>> so it's an honest signal.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?
>>>
>>>>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>>>>>
>>>> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
>>>> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
>>>> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.
>>>
>>> I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.
>>>
>>>>> What textbook did you write?
>>>>>
>>>> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
>>>> to be a games programmer.
>>>> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
>>>
>>> Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.
>>>
>> You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
>> on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
>> creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
>> I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.
>> --
>> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
>>
>> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
>> minds." Einstein
>
> Yes, I've been programming in C++ since I was 12. I'm very familiar with C++ and have used it very frequently.
>

To get a good job programming C++ you must have experience with very
complex projects, millions of lines of code. Alternatively you can do
Linux web-server projects.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 6/8/2021 1:40 PM, DV wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail..com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
> >>>>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
> >>>>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
> >>>>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
> >>>>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
> >>>>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
> >>>>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
> >>>>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
> >>>>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
> >>>>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
> >>>>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
> >>>>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
> >>>>>
> >>>> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
> >>>> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
> >>>> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
> >>>> so it's an honest signal.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?
> >>>
> >>>>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
> >>>>>
> >>>> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
> >>>> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
> >>>> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.
> >>>
> >>> I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.
> >>>
> >>>>> What textbook did you write?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
> >>>> to be a games programmer.
> >>>> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
> >>>
> >>> Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.
> >>>
> >> You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
> >> on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
> >> creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
> >> I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.
> >> --
> >> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
> >>
> >> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
> >> minds." Einstein
> >
> > Yes, I've been programming in C++ since I was 12. I'm very familiar with C++ and have used it very frequently.
> >
> To get a good job programming C++ you must have experience with very
> complex projects, millions of lines of code. Alternatively you can do
> Linux web-server projects.
> --
> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
>
> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
> minds." Einstein

Some of the other things you've said on comp.theory seem misleading and false. Is the advice you're giving really true? If so and you're not stating falsehoods in this case, can you provide some evidence of what you're saying and also some more detail? I hope you are not out to be a career saboteur. Lies about the halting problem are less serious according to my understanding.

On 6/8/2021 2:13 PM, DV wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/8/2021 1:40 PM, DV wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/8/2021 1:11 PM, DV wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 1:44:16 PM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 16:31:32 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 11:07:57 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 14:41:43 UTC+1, DV wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 8:20:45 AM UTC-4, malcolm.ar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 8 June 2021 at 03:37:21 UTC+1, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Definition of proletariat
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proletariat
>>>>>>>>>>> 1 : the laboring class especially : the class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labor to live
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That definition ignores education and training.
>>>>>>>>>> 19th century industry involved large numbers of workers who learned on the job and didn't have much formal education.
>>>>>>>>>> The modern economy employs a lot of workers who have qualifications, and who couldn't do their jobs
>>>>>>>>>> without the qualifications. So possesion of a qualification is valuable, and, for various reasons, highly
>>>>>>>>>> qualified workers tend to be paid more than those with lesser qualifications. In fact this is the most salient
>>>>>>>>>> feature of the modern social structure.
>>>>>>>>> Do you think increased availability of textbooks has helped self-educating workers improve the GDP?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know. You'd think that improved access to textbooks would have an effect, but it's hard to
>>>>>>>> demonstrate that this is actually the case as opposed to just assuming it on the basis of common sense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm a textbook author myself so I'd like to think that reading a textbook can teach you a lot. However
>>>>>>>> most people also need guidance. Otherwise no-one would incur the massive bills for private school
>>>>>>>> education and university education, they'd just buy a few textbooks from the web and read them.
>>>>>>> I think it ought to help. Many employers would claim they know how to "recognize talent," and yet they also rely on university and other credentials to guide them regarding whom to hire. That's a mistake, because universities are mainly focused on guiding students, not employers. Firms that rely solely on the acquisition of university credentials to judge talent are going to be less competitive than firms that can actually tell who is smart based on some sort of evaluation-oriented process for applicants, secret or not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> A lot of economists and behavioural scientists think that university degrees are mainly what is known in the
>>>>>> field as "signalling". The university doesn't actually need to teach anything. It just has to recruit students who
>>>>>> are in the top few percent of the population. If it does that well, attendance at a university is hard to fake,
>>>>>> so it's an honest signal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the claim that it could be read as a signal. What do you think the honest signal says?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is also hard to ensure that universities will be correct in issuing credentials (degrees) that genuinely vouch for students' skill. Even one single unacknowledged dishonest or inaccurate claim can really do a tremendous amount of damage to any entity that claims to be an excellent judge of talent or anything else. Sometimes, consumers of information will be less than understanding when they have a lot at stake and feel misled by a so-called "good source." It sometimes really hurts to learn that a trusted source was actually incorrect or misleading about something. Not everyone understands that, though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are two filters, university admissions and the final degree certification. Then, whilst a few degrees are accredited by
>>>>>> professional bodies, that's the exception. Most don't state that they offer competence for any particular job. And for
>>>>>> most jobs, academic ability is a requirement, but it's not sufficient.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I noticed that I was able to get programming-type jobs pretty readily in 2009 just out of university (undergraduate). I had to quit working in 2011 for reasons, and then 10 years later, when I was fully able to get back into the job market and quite prepared, I couldn't find a job again anywhere. I can't even get a serious email from a computer programming firm, let alone a serious interview. I think I'm in process of being about to be done being messed with by a fake (?) educate-and-contract headhunting firm, i.e., I am about to be sure I've been ghosted in a sense. That was the only serious firm that contacted me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't really understand what has caused me to be unable to get a job. I really should be able to; I have a math degree, some CS coursework, plenty of (fairly basic) independent C++ experience, and a very good ability to learn new things.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What textbook did you write?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Basic Algorithms. It's a C "cookbook" with a heavy emphasis on graphics and audio programming because I used
>>>>>> to be a games programmer.
>>>>>> https://www.lulu.com/shop/malcolm-mclean/basic-algorithms/ebook/product-17550309.html?page=1&pageSize=4
>>>>>
>>>>> Your book looks interesting to me. I would probably think about buying it if I had a job that it was relevant to helping me do. I'm actually quite fond of C++ development.
>>>>>
>>>> You can gain real world experience at home by using a free C++ compiler
>>>> on your own projects. I have been doing C++ since 2005 and met its
>>>> creator Bjarne Stroustrup when he was promoting his new C++ language.
>>>> I have been doing C since K&R was the standard.
>>>> --
>>>> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
>>>>
>>>> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
>>>> minds." Einstein
>>>
>>> Yes, I've been programming in C++ since I was 12. I'm very familiar with C++ and have used it very frequently.
>>>
>> To get a good job programming C++ you must have experience with very
>> complex projects, millions of lines of code. Alternatively you can do
>> Linux web-server projects.
>> --
>> Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
>>
>> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
>> minds." Einstein
>
> Some of the other things you've said on comp.theory seem misleading and false. Is the advice you're giving really true? If so and you're not stating falsehoods in this case, can you provide some evidence of what you're saying and also some more detail? I hope you are not out to be a career saboteur. Lies about the halting problem are less serious according to my understanding.
>

I am telling the truth about the halting problem.
The problem is that people are so indoctrinated that
they still think that I am wrong even though no one
could point out any actual error in six months of daily
review by more than six reviewers.

To get Richard to understand that H must abort its
input took three months of daily dialogue.

If he wanted to understand what I was saying he would have
understood this on the first day.

The advice that I gave on C++ programming positions can be easily
verified by examining advertised c++ programmer positions.

https://www.indeed.com/q-Entry-Level-C++-Programmer-jobs.html

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein