article seems to be based on a shortcoming of understanding. The point of a utomating things is to reduce work time, increase productivity, reduce the required skill level of the worker, and sometimes reduce mistakes, and thus reduce the cost per task. Thats close to always the point because its the bottom line of business. Its a good thing, a given workforce can achieve fa r more today.
Its not news that when every set had a 'line hold' knob most people had a p artial understanding of it, now that its automated few do.
automating things is to reduce work time, increase productivity, reduce th e required skill level of the worker, and sometimes reduce mistakes, and th us reduce the cost per task. Thats close to always the point because its th e bottom line of business. Its a good thing, a given workforce can achieve far more today.
partial understanding of it, now that its automated few do.
Plugging my previous posting into a readability program, I find that my writing is suitable for the 6th grade of 11 to 12 year olds. Note that #MainContent tacked onto the end: Testing just your above paragraph (starting with Ah, you need...), you're writing is suitable for grade level 7 of 12 to 13 year old. From this, I would conclude that your logic is somewhat over my head, and in need of dumbing down. Please adjust your IQ accordingly.
I must confess that I sometimes run my scribbling through this web page to make sure that my rants do not overload the intellectual capacity of my audience. Most often, it's simply a matter of replacing words with three or more syllables with the colloquial equivalents. "Hey dude. That's like really cool." seems to work better than eloquence.
My first job out of college was fixing CB radios, a step down from the job I had prior to entering college (mostly to hide from the draft).
There's been some unsuccessful litigation by jobless graduates for "educational malpractice" and "breach of contract" which suggests that possession of a diploma will somehow entitle them to instant employment. Historically, the situation was backwards. Colleges were originally intended to educate the sons of the wealthy on what was expected of them and how to act like a cultured and superior member of the upper classes. Meanwhile, the GUM (great unwashed masses) looked at the graduates of such colleges, and noticed that they were wealthy and well placed. Without more than a cursory look at the situation, they somehow concluded that attending college would somehow also make them wealthy and well placed. Attracted by the additional revenue from the merchant classes, the colleges were quite willing to admit the boorish multitudes to their cloistered halls. Although probably disappointed by the lack of results, graduates tended to not publicize the mistake, resulting in a perception of success, and a perpetuation of the institution. As with most systems, garbage in always results in garbage out.
Oddly, I don't recall receiving a limited educational warranty from any of the three colleges that tolerated my presence. At the time (late 1960's) it was assumed that there was no warranty, expressed or implied. Since this was the Viet Nam war era, there was a substantial demand for a college education (aka deferment), resulting in colleges trying to eliminate those that were unsuitable, unworthy, or politically inconvenient. The only legal way to do this was by thoroughly terrorizing students with massive work loads, impossible schedules, exams from hell, and placement tests. Hiring industry dropouts at administrators and teachers insured the survival of the fittest.
Meanwhile, industry had discovered the real value of a college graduate. The recruiters did not care about what students had learned. They would soon learn what they needed to know on the job. What they looked for were survivors of the aforementioned ordeal process, that demonstrated that they can survive the abuse, overwork, and examinations. These graduates also demonstrated that they could actually attend somewhat useless classes for at least 4 years without exhibiting signs of terminal boredom, which is a very useful skill in a corporate environment.
However, those glorious days of full employment didn't last. When the economy took a dive, the recruiters disappeared, and the attributes considered desirable were now useless. Prospective employers now wanted employees that already knew how to do things, were somewhat organized, and knew which end of the soldering iron to grab. It took many years and economic cycles for the colleges to adjust to this new paradigm. I'm not sure if prospective college student have ever adjusted to this reality.
Many years ago, when I was still on good terms with the local high skool, I was invited to talk to a class of prospective college students on the topic of engineering as a career. My somewhat cynical attitude made me a dubious choice, but lacking anyone else available, I promised to do my best. There were other speakers and I was last (in the hope that they would run out of time). I gave my glossed over spiel on what an engineer does, and asked for questions. Dead silence. Then, they started coming, asking about all manner of things, none of which had anything to do with engineering. Office politics, benefits, stock options, raises, teamwork, vacations, retirement, overtime, etc. I did a really bad thing. I told them the truth, which probably made some student reconsider their future careers. I was not invited to return the next semester.
Today, the questions would be different. I suspect I would get questions about outsourcing, H1B, design automation, and obsolescence. Over the years, I've noticed very little change in the intelligence distribution of high skool graduates. A small number will do well no matter what profession they select. The largest number will need to work at whatever they chose, with success going mostly to the lucky, financially solvent, and reasonably devious individuals. A substantial number at the bottom of the scale are certain to fail at whatever they attempt. Think bell curve. Although the concerns and toys were different over the years, the intelligence distribution seems to be about the same. Automation didn't change anything for the students.
In the 1960's, the few companies I worked for had 10 year and 25 year plans. Today, they have a 2 or 3 year plan with selling the company to a conglomerate or a corporate raider within 10 years. The larger companies are different. In the 1960's, they a few had 50 year plans for global domination. Today, the plans are the same, except they plan to do it within 8 years (the 2 term election cycle).
I attended Cal Poly Pomona. At the time, the curriculum was full of labs and hands-on classes. The skool motto was "Learn by Doing". I was useless with theory, but vary good at doing things, so this suited me quite well. In my opinion, it worked as the graduates were in high demand by companies that wanted graduates to get a head start on the learning curve. However, there was a problem. The college was not accredited. A few years after I was graduated, the college became accredited largely by replacing labs and hands-on classes with useless general education and liberal arts classes. The purpose was to produce a well rounded graduate, capable of getting along in any work or social environment, but able to do little that was useful.
I used to have a large collection of EDN, Electronic Design, Design News, Machine Design, etc magazines in my office at one employer. When asked why I had such a large collection, I truthfully answered that this was from where I steal my best designs. Today, I use Google, but the methodology is much the same.
Any student that expects the professor to know everything will soon be disillusioned. My usual line was that the teacher need only know more than the best student, and then only to prevent embarrassing exchanges like the one above.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Oh, but they do think, just not the way you want them to think. Roll back the clock to your college days and try to recall your concerns, priorities, and objectives. Here are mine, circa about 1969: 1. Dodge the draft by maintaining a 2S student deferment. 2. Make enough money with part time summer jobs to afford college. 3. Pass the exams so I can stay in college. 4. Learn something. 5. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
If I convert the above priorities into percent of available time, 99% of my time was consumed by the first three priorities. Learning something was an incidental side effect of the first three. At best, short term learning techniques worked best for passing the exams. I would cram 2 days before, relax the day before, and generally do well on the exam. The next day, I had forgotten most of what I had "learned".
This is nothing new. In my present profession as a computer consultant, I often give short explanations (or lectures) on various computer topics to customers. I preface all of them with: "I do not expect you to remember everything I say today. At best you'll remember 10% of what I say. However, you will remember that I mumbled something about xxxxxx and I expect you to do some basic Googling on the topic of xxxxxx which should help your remember. If not, then call me." It doesn't always work perfectly, but it does help. Now, do you really expect students to remember 100% of what they had learned? I don't. The inability to recall everything from 4 years of cramming does not translate into an inability to think.
Incidentally, few of my customers take notes when I offer procedures and explanations. When I practically demand that they take notes (so I don't have to repeat my song and dance over the phone a few days later), I can easily see the problem. They don't know how to take notes. All the bad habits that were drilled out of college students seem to be epidemic. Huge letters, triple space lines, illegible scrawl, lack of organization, etc are common. I sometimes asked job applicants to take notes and have observed that their organization abilities and sometimes their logical thinking seems to follow their note taking style.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Let it run for a few more hours and it may converge at the correct answer!
My formal writing is usually off the charts. I tend to cram too much in too few words, too many clauses, etc. I guess *I* prefer that to "See Dick run! Run, Dick, run!"
Expletives are also effective!
I think the pendulum may have swung too far to the extreme. It's as if the schools are now on a (commercial) par with fast food joints, etc.
I had *one* professor who always taught (lecture) at 9AM. Of course, this was unbearably early for many of us! He volunteered the reason for this was that he didn't think we deserve a degree without attending at least one 9A class! I guess that's as good a reason as any...
Many of the folks I went to school with could *not* use a soldering iron.
A good friend was preparing to order a $400 "A/D converter board" so he could read the position of a pot. ("Um, why not use the pot to control the frequency of a multivibrator and just trigger an interrupt from that?")
I discourage most folks from engineering careers ("programming" as well) if their interests haven't suggested to me that they would actually *enjoy* (be stimulated by) this sort of work. I've met too many bad engineers that I attribute to a lack of genuine interest *in* engineering.
"Why don't you get an MBA, instead?"
I think (here, not sure of other school districts) the relationship of teacher and student. I see machines now used a lot to babysit kids instead of interpersonal interactions -- similar to parents sitting their kids in front of the TV to keep them "occupied".
Where I see it making a difference in the workplace is that it tends to take the possibility of any thought away from the employee -- esp youngsters. If they don't know/remember which button to press for , they call for assistance (instead of thinking it out).
And, they aren't *encouraged* to think it out! Instead, thinking can lead to a MISTAKE! :-/
Most of my education was in theory and "upcoming technologies". E.g., one group was given a bunch of VAXEN as "personal workstations" just to see what was likely to happen when individuals had that sort of processing power at their disposal (instead of sharing it).
We were required to take 8 (?) "Humanities" courses allegedly to make sure we were "well rounded" (ha!). But, even the labs were designed with an eye on the theory. E.g., understanding the input impedance of the scope and how it factors into the measurement of a "token circuit" (by contrast, other schools may have neglected *demonstrating* this in favor of showing how the scope was *used* to measure things).
Professor's goal is to show you how to figure out what you will (someday) need by exposing you to tools (theory and methods) and suggesting how they can be "applied". I.e., "using what we've been discussing in class, YOU should be able to figure out the number of TTT games... tell me how you did it, next week"
At MIT, that was the first thing they signed you up for ;-)
I had a full scholarship, so I only had to work for books and eating out. First year I washed dishes at the Graduate House cafeteria (ugh), then I got a technician job in Building 20 (Woodson, Melcher, et al).
Never a problem, I was your gung-ho nerd.
Likewise, I was a sponge.
Married my sophomore year... still married to her :-)
Nobody is gung-ho anymore... they just want a job to make money so they can buy another APP for their "smart" phone... I design chips because I find the challenges great fun, so it's a hobby rather than a forced job... and people pay me to play ;-) ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
I guess I had a slightly different take on the article. To me it seems like something that is happening all the time. We move the knowledge into the machine. I've got several instrument examples. (Super conducting magnets, Vacuum pumping stations... which in my youth you had to understand to operate, but now you can just push a button.)
But the easiest example is perhaps starting your car. In the past. (well even before my time.) You turned on the magneto, fuel, choke, put the crank in and turned it. (I'm mostly likely leaving out some crucial steps.) You had to understand how the car worked and started to get it going. Today you just push a button.
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 08:44:20 -0700, Jim Thompson Gave us:
I think the weird causation for this is like why chips double in element count every couple years.
Companies have compiled huge amounts of intelligence, and new hires can practically coast through many stages of modern product development.
Jobs like Jim's are needed because there are still real electronics being done at some point in the game. The real engineers at those companies should fight hard to insure that the company has VERY intelligent HR personnel to insure that intelligent engineering stock gets fed down to the current engineering staff for chaff culling. Sad thing is that so many companies are so big now, that they do not even cull the chaff any more, and gangs of actual idiots have made it from the college campuses into the companies we thought we were going to optimize.
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 07:58:23 -0800 (PST), George Herold Gave us:
Been that way a long time.
formatting link
Not just the info store.
Remember the CRC Handbook?
The main function of them is to PROCESS faster and better than we. We need to keep using them for that.
Too many idiots spending their day with their eyes crossed too goddamned close together.
Get back to a desk, and get work done, and emails are twice a day, and what you do not answer in that end day session, you answer on your time or the next morning. Speech is what separates us from the other furry critters, and it is far more efficient than text.
I never believe it when some idiot "witness" on a stand states that they do not remember something which occurred right in front of them, and which they previously exclaimed being a witness to. Especially if they were not on anything.
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 07:58:23 -0800 (PST), George Herold Gave us:
Back then, the coil, points, battery connections, battery *condition*, fuel mix, air... all had to be there for it to "go", and the operator had to disseminate the point at which to curtail the energization of the starter motor.(or even reach under the car and hit it with a hammer to get it going in the first place)(typical GM cold weather problem).
Today, there is no carburetor to "flood" the plugs with. The plugs are platinum tipped, so they hold their shape and gap perfectly for a very long time. The induction system is fed by fuel injectors which never fail and are not the old, pump fed, loaded line pressure pulsed units, they are computer fired, solenoid actuated injector 'valves', and the spark getting fed is by individual coils on each plug or plug pair, and there are computer monitored transducers all over the place to decide if the first 'blah blah duration' pulse to the starter worked. It always assumes it will, and that pulse is not where it 'looks' for a running motor. It assumes it WILL work, and 'looks' after. If it failed, THEN it fires the starter pulse again, likely with the same half second or so duration.
Automation should take the *tedium* out of activities; not the decision making. Instead, it tends to leave trivial decision making and lots of tedium!
E.g., my irrigation controller embodies lots of "knowledge" about the flora in its guardianship. Along with the limitations of the system itself (i.e., the pipes have fixed capacities... you can't consume water at a rate greater than that which it can be supplied!). And, the preferences of the homeowner(s) -- "please don't use water when it would adversely affect the water pressure within the house (e.g., taking showers and finding the cold water supply suddenly dropping!)"
It's tedious for a human to have to juggle all these constraints IN ADDITION to trying to determine when various plantings "need" water (weather conditions, age of the planting, soil conditions, etc.)
So, take that bit of tedium off of his plate and let him focus on evaluating the *performance* of the system as evidenced by how well
*he* (in his expert opinion) thinks the plants are thriving. "This plant needs more water" instead of "add 3 minutes, twice a week, to zone 6 during the dry season" (the latter being an example of forcing more tedium onto the user... he is now slaved to the automation instead of ADVISOR to it!)
I've enjoyed and learned from your postings in this newsgroup over the years, but I have to say that I'm very disappointed with you for throwing out an unsupported -- and apparently unresearched -- blanket statement like this one.
Back in the Dark Ages(*) I attended and managed to eventually graduate from that tiny but august institution(**):
formatting link
While it's true that in those days we had some strange students at New College (and a few _very_ strange ones), I'm not convinced that they were any stranger than those attending similar institutions; moer to thr point, I don't recall any of them being boring. Annoying at times, yes; boring, no.
It's true that, on occasion, one or two had a bit more imagination than I appreciated, and in directions that I wasn't always comfortable with, but the same might have been said about me at the time.
Please retract your claim and assign yourself 20 hours of Hyper- Sensitivity Awareness Training. There's a lot of hyper-sensitivity going around these days, and you clearly need to be more aware of it.
Frank McKenney
(*) A few years before Sarasota passed its Dinosaur Leash Law. (**) They were kind, and I was persistant.
--
An inventor is simply a fellow who doesn't take his education
too seriously. -- Charles F. Kettering
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
6'5", 289 pound black thug, shot by white COP => unarmed black _teenager_, "He was such a good boy" ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.