>Plagiarizing some work doesn't really hurt the work, it hurts you.
and a job well done is its own reward right? i think it's very pretentious to say that to a person who's attending school in order to improve their lot in life (because credentials count for so much); that what's more important than the credential is some abstract notion of improvement. you might as well cast it in terms of sin and salvation.
But isn't this abstract notion of improvement supposed to be the entire point of education? It feels to me like education's purpose is undermined by its role as a prerequisite for a middle-class career. "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."
Abstract or not, it's completely qualitative / subjective. Easy to argue. Very easy. Try it: Pick a specific, abstract notion, name the institution, and talk to the students.
Sure, if the life you want is to be at a desk for 8 hours a day regurgitating your superior's existing biases back at them, go ahead. I find employers much prefer someone that can attack a real problem and think critically about potential solutions from multiple levels of analysis. If all you're good at is chewing someone else's cud and spitting it out with a slightly different word order then you're useless to people that actually want to solve problems.
And, sorry to say, credentials are counting for less and less every year. If employers have to take a year to train you to think critically, then what use does a credential serve as a filter? I wonder why that's happening...
(for work) I have both "plaigiarised" a policy that I found on the internet, AND written one using as source the ToC of 2-3 other policies, but did the fill-ups all by myself. I learned nothing from copy&paste, I gained plenty from typing it up from scratch myself (even added points that the ToC's were missing).
The clients got the same value (they wanted a v1 policy, and they got one). I became better by doing the work, so next time I had a discussion on the matter I felt that I controlled the discussion instead of pitching in.
Faking it till you make it has the risk that you fake it forever and you become the paradigm of the Peter Principle.
Walking the walk takes more time but always benefits in the long run.
I have met plenty of people though that take the risk to never grow/evolve and stay in their comfort zone because they just want the base salary to fund their hobbies and they get no sense of accomplishment through their work (for many reasons)(I am not getting into this discussion).
Edit:
Ps: I now work like this (when asked to develop a policy for a new client): spend some time thinking of key points (technology changes fast enough in some areas), drop a couple of examples for each bullet point, and then "plagiarise" from previously made work. This way I have prepared part of the downstream Procedures. You would think that a Policy is high (enough) level so it shouldn't need frequent changes, but different clients want different things.
> a person who's attending school in order to improve their lot in life (because credentials count for so much)
If every person at the school had this reasoning, the credentials wouldn't count for anything.
The credentials only count for something if enough of the people graduating are actually fulfilling this promise of self improvement in the subject of their studies.
The cheaters are literally freeloading off the prestige of the credentials produced by the people who do put in the effort. If that group of people did not exist, the credentials would be useless to the cheaters as well.
> in order to improve their lot in life (because credentials count for so much);
Those credentials only matter insofar as they describe the likely caliber of the alumni that come from that particular school. Being a terrible student isn't going to help the value of your degree a whole lot...
lol that's not what it means at all. almost sure/almost everywhere/complement has measure 0 means exactly what it says: the set can be covered by a countable cover whose measure is zero. that's it and no more. no one ever says something like "the normal distribution 100% of the time is not 0" even though { x = 0 } has measure zero.
Not just related—the staircase is built by, in essence, putting stairs on the ternary set. There's enough Cantor set to get from 0 to 1, but not enough to disturb the almost-everywhere vanishing of the derivative.
the gradient doesn't exist but subgradients do exist (at points of non-differentiability) and that is still useful (case in point as someone else mentions ReLU)
there was a comment posted by rayiner that was quickly deleted
>It’s a Constitutional (and undoubtedly contractual) requirement. Police officers are employed pursuant to a contract. A contractual benefit is considered a property interest that cannot be taken away without “due process.” Hence police officers remain employed (and getting paid) until an investigation establishes they actually did something wrong. Private employers don’t need to provide due process so this doesn’t apply.
probably deleted because it's wrong; deleted before i could submit my response:
>It’s a Constitutional (and undoubtedly contractual) requirement.
you're wrong
> “Property interests, of course, are not created by the Constitution. Rather, they are created and their dimensions are defined by existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law—rules or understandings that secure certain benefits and that support claims of entitlement to those benefits.”
so it's a matter of “legitimate entitlements”. in fact "legislature may elect not to confer a property interest in federal employment" and moreover in Bishop v. Wood SC accepted a lower court's opinion that police are employed at will even if discharge is conditional on due process.
i'm a phd student at uf (in cs not ece) and from what i can tell nothing has been done to discipline tao. there were mutterings when his student committed suicide but nothing since then.
>real Enums added as a language-feature along with type-hinting are almost 100% on-par with statically typed languages
sorry i don't understand this. i'm not trying to be pedantic but: statically typed (and type-checked) language will fail to compile ... not just warn you. that's not a 1% difference that's the entire difference (because lots of people will miss or flat out ignore ide hints).
>Firming up what had long been held as common practice, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976 ruled in Imbler v. Pachtman that prosecutors cannot face civil lawsuits for prosecutorial abuses, no matter how severe
What other job exists on the face of the planet where there's such a strong guarantee and therefore so much moral hazard?
Normally I would consider this off-topic, but prosecutors depend on relationships with law enforcement to try and argue court cases. Corruption and abuses are people problems, as much as institutional problems. It’s important to align incentives toward justice in all areas of the justice system.
i've been looking for it as well and haven't been able to find it. i wouldn't be surprised if journalists are keeping it close because fb puts a watermark in streams to catch leakers. so it's not available to keep the leaker anonymous.
and a job well done is its own reward right? i think it's very pretentious to say that to a person who's attending school in order to improve their lot in life (because credentials count for so much); that what's more important than the credential is some abstract notion of improvement. you might as well cast it in terms of sin and salvation.