What kind of education do you plan to follow /are you following/ have you followed?

Recommended Videos

S.H.A.R.P.

New member
Mar 4, 2009
883
0
0
DreadfulSorry said:
Wow you must be quite enthusiastic about your line of work. I chose my direction partially based upon the prospects of a good job, and along that a fine paycheck. Sure you won?t be bankrupt, and I?m sure that you?ll be able to pay your loans, but it seems that it might take a while before you can afford a bit more luxurious items. You have my respect sir, chasing your dreams in spite of the drawbacks! Many luck and happiness to you!

DoctorNick said:
80 bloody thousand dollars!!! I can see your hesitation there; I don?t think tuition fees are that expensive in the Netherlands. Though these loans are fortunately not very wicked, with a gentle interest, but interest from that amount of money must be a soar stone in your boot.

Also good to know you don?t plan to loose any sleep over your planned occupation, and your reasoning for doing so are sound enough. Guns are considered very different in the Netherlands then in the US though. In fact, the only guns I?ve seen are in second hand stores, on police officers, and on the tv and in games. Perhaps living in a more gun-liberal country changes your views on such an item, but I still would face some moral quandaries about pursuing such an occupation.

Hunde Des Krieg said:
Considering your avatar and profile, I would have expected something in the lines of a vegetarian, or dog trainer. Still, bikes are cool so have fun in deciding what to do!

Lord_Ascendant said:
Cool, do you plan to expand upon your own fiction (assuming your profile bio is not a real world happening!)? Have you got any special aspirations concerning authorship, e.g. writing fictional novels, or going more the journalism side, or just taking up whatever chance you have?

Izerous said:
Ho ho hold your horses there! Care to explain what you mean with gr 10/11 and gr12 for us non English natives? Whatever it is though, it sounds quite impressive ;).
What do you plan to get a masters degree in? And do you have any specific aspirations considering your career?

scotth266 said:
You won?t be the only ones on the Escapist I?m sure, it would be funny to see a developer studio spawned from the users here! Oh and what do you mean with an RPI? Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute? Recognition Professionals International? Republican Party of India? Probably not so please explain :).
 

waggmd

New member
Feb 12, 2009
286
0
0
I am almost finished my first year of engineering, and I am planning to get into enviromental engineering with a minor in buisness studies or social sciences. Add Co-op job placement, and hopefully involvment in Eningeers Without Borders I am looking into at least 4 to 5 more years of school.
 

nbrown48

New member
May 19, 2008
26
0
0
on my second year at Loughborough university, doing a masters in systems engineering with an industrial placement year next year with BAE systems
 

Portaldude

New member
Jan 31, 2009
5
0
0
S.H.A.R.P. said:
Portaldude said:
*snip* I must say my math classes leaves a lot to be desired, mainly since they are more calculation than math.
*snip*
That makes sense I guess in technical school.
Arh, one could think it is mere technical school, but I assure it is not. The reason you think it is is due to my inability to find a more appropiate term. We are called HTX, and while it has an hands on approach on many things, it also aims to give pupils a more theoretical base to work from.

But my grief with the math classes is how it just they put most of my classmates brains in standby. They just whip out their calculators and presses on the keypad and let it do the rest. They do not understand the theory behind the calculations, nor will they be capable of applying their mathematical knowledge on real world situations. Engineers are more than able to look at problem and determining which mathematical tools they need to solve it, since they have an understanding of how calculus and other branches work.

We don't. A typical assignment is basicly "add 2 + 5i and 3 + i", or multiply, or take the squareroot, or some other misserable mindless calculation task. No brain activity, no thinking about how to extract the nessecary information to solve the problem... That is my grief with my math classes.

But luckily, I am a mere 3 months away from graduation.
 

Izerous

New member
Dec 15, 2008
202
0
0
S.H.A.R.P. said:
Izerous said:
Ho ho hold your horses there! Care to explain what you mean with gr 10/11 and gr12 for us non English natives? Whatever it is though, it sounds quite impressive ;).
What do you plan to get a masters degree in? And do you have any specific aspirations considering your career?
To elaborate. I did really well in school up to Grade 11 (2nd last year in high school). Getting honors every year. Grade 12 I was out drinking, working, skipping classes and lost my honors marks. (honors being 85% average or higher). Skipped a month and a half of math class dropping my average for that class down to 50% right before my final exam in my last semester. Managed to pull and awesome score on that test and raise my final average up to 70%+ but still lost my honors status that year because of it.

The Bacehelors Degree i currently have is in computer programming. If I do get the master's degree it will also be for programming.

As for a career I joined a small start up company that has quadrupled it's size since I started. The only person that is really above me is the owner so I'll be sticking around for a while.
 

Barret268

New member
Mar 19, 2009
11
0
0
This is how It went for me in my country. 6 years primary, 3 years Junior High(some crap test at the end of it, did ok) , 3 years High School (Matura at the end something like the A-levels), and now University studying English. Working on my Bachelor and aiming for Masters.
Ever since the 4th grade i do not care about grades, as long as it's a pass.
 

Carteblanche

New member
Mar 19, 2009
6
0
0
Specter_ said:
Inverse Skies said:
(I'm not sure about great-grand parents, but even then I don't think so)
so the chances to develop cancer (as it's main cause is simply age) .
please promise me you will never say such garbage again or i will cause you severe pain. of the few things that can really piss me off its saying stuff like that, because believe me, when someone close to you dies from cancer when you are 15 such comments seem to be nothing but lies - you want causes of cancer http://www.whale.to/cancer/finnegan.html
 

lordoftheLOL

New member
Mar 12, 2009
13
0
0
I am going to continue through high school, and possibly get a scholarship to the Military College in Kingston, and come out an officer in the Air Force.
 

Specter_

New member
Dec 24, 2008
736
0
0
Carteblanche said:
Specter_ said:
Inverse Skies said:
(I'm not sure about great-grand parents, but even then I don't think so)
so the chances to develop cancer (as it's main cause is simply age) .
please promise me you will never say such garbage again or i will cause you severe pain. of the few things that can really piss me off its saying stuff like that, because believe me, when someone close to you dies from cancer when you are 15 such comments seem to be nothing but lies - you want causes of cancer http://www.whale.to/cancer/finnegan.html
Ok, I'm not gonna laugh in your face... Well, actually I do.

You actually quote from a site (and a book from the same guy) with the sentence: "Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) was the author of The Cancer Solution & Deadly Deception, and an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax."

Still can't stop laughing.

That guy tried to cure AIDS with ozone [http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/cohen/266-5191-1642a.pdf].

You are hilarious.

Smoking, which is #2 cause of cancer, is listed as the 7th, the SEVENTH, item on that list.
Get your research right, then come back here, I might forgive you.

Something you might find interesting to start your research from: Cancer is primarily a disease of older Canadians: 42% of new cancer cases and 60% of cancer deaths will occur among those who are at least 70 years old. [http://www.cancer.ca/canada-wide/about%20cancer/cancer%20statistics/stats%20at%20a%20glance/general%20cancer%20stats.aspx?sc_lang=en]
 

Carteblanche

New member
Mar 19, 2009
6
0
0
Specter_ said:
Ok, I'm not gonna laugh in your face... Well, actually I do.

You actually quote from a site (and a book from the same guy) with the sentence: "Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) was the author of The Cancer Solution & Deadly Deception, and an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax."

Still can't stop laughing.

That guy tried to cure AIDS with ozone [http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/cohen/266-5191-1642a.pdf].

You are hilarious.

Smoking, which is #2 cause of cancer, is listed as the 7th, the SEVENTH, item on that list.
Get your research right, then come back here, I might forgive you.

Something you might find interesting to start your research from: Cancer is primarily a disease of older Canadians: 42% of new cancer cases and 60% of cancer deaths will occur among those who are at least 70 years old. [http://www.cancer.ca/canada-wide/about%20cancer/cancer%20statistics/stats%20at%20a%20glance/general%20cancer%20stats.aspx?sc_lang=en]
My my, youve outdone yourself.....
I've always looked down on modern societies lack of insight but you are a top notch A-grade retard. As expected from such you completely missed the point of my post and as such thought not with your brain but your obviously overly-large sense of self importance and pride.
My post, had you used your brain, was directed at the fact that if you had lost someone close to you when the person was of young age you would not so callously said garbage like the main cause of cancer is age.

Cancer(medical term: malignant neoplasm)
Malignant (from the Latin roots mal- = "bad" and -genus = "born") is a medical term used to describe a severe and progressively worsening disease
Neoplasm: the scientific term to describe an abnormal proliferation of genetically altered cells. Neoplasms can be benign or malignant
Nearly all cancers are caused by abnormalities in the genetic material of the transformed cells.In essence, cancer is caused by the same mechanism that allows for evolution: anything which replicates (our cells) will probabilistically suffer from errors (mutations)?unless error correction is properly carried out, the errors will survive and propagate.

IE cancer is fundamentally the malignant growth of cells with mutated DNA
As scientist cannot completely explain this mutation a direct cause cannot be given, they can only suggest items which can increase the likelihood of cancer developing.

And as you were only too happy to insult the link in my previous post, which was not meant to be a highly scientific explanation into causes of cancer but merely a point that there are much more likely causes of cancer, notice how the heading is Main Causes of Cancer, NOT "In descending order The Top 10 Causes of Cancer"

But even with all of the above finally i will once again bring your attention back to the fact that my post was not to create any dispute on causes of cancer, but a reminder that many comments that come so tactlessly from people like you(whose ego should it have any weight would crush the universe) can mean significantly more to others to which your comment could have painful reminders
 

Specter_

New member
Dec 24, 2008
736
0
0
Carteblanche said:
Specter_ said:
Ok, I'm not gonna laugh in your face... Well, actually I do.

You actually quote from a site (and a book from the same guy) with the sentence: "Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) was the author of The Cancer Solution & Deadly Deception, and an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax."

Still can't stop laughing.

That guy tried to cure AIDS with ozone [http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/cohen/266-5191-1642a.pdf].

You are hilarious.

Smoking, which is #2 cause of cancer, is listed as the 7th, the SEVENTH, item on that list.
Get your research right, then come back here, I might forgive you.

Something you might find interesting to start your research from: Cancer is primarily a disease of older Canadians: 42% of new cancer cases and 60% of cancer deaths will occur among those who are at least 70 years old. [http://www.cancer.ca/canada-wide/about%20cancer/cancer%20statistics/stats%20at%20a%20glance/general%20cancer%20stats.aspx?sc_lang=en]
My my, youve outdone yourself.....
I've always looked down on modern societies lack of insight but you are a top notch A-grade retard. As expected from such you completely missed the point of my post and as such thought not with your brain but your obviously overly-large sense of self importance and pride.
My post, had you used your brain, was directed at the fact that if you had lost someone close to you when the person was of young age you would not so callously said garbage like the main cause of cancer is age.

Cancer(medical term: malignant neoplasm)
Malignant (from the Latin roots mal- = "bad" and -genus = "born") is a medical term used to describe a severe and progressively worsening disease
Neoplasm: the scientific term to describe an abnormal proliferation of genetically altered cells. Neoplasms can be benign or malignant
Nearly all cancers are caused by abnormalities in the genetic material of the transformed cells.In essence, cancer is caused by the same mechanism that allows for evolution: anything which replicates (our cells) will probabilistically suffer from errors (mutations)?unless error correction is properly carried out, the errors will survive and propagate.

IE cancer is fundamentally the malignant growth of cells with mutated DNA
As scientist cannot completely explain this mutation a direct cause cannot be given, they can only suggest items which can increase the likelihood of cancer developing.

And as you were only too happy to insult the link in my previous post, which was not meant to be a highly scientific explanation into causes of cancer but merely a point that there are much more likely causes of cancer, notice how the heading is Main Causes of Cancer, NOT "In descending order The Top 10 Causes of Cancer"

But even with all of the above finally i will once again bring your attention back to the fact that my post was not to create any dispute on causes of cancer, but a reminder that many comments that come so tactlessly from people like you(whose ego should it have any weight would crush the universe) can mean significantly more to others to which your comment could have painful reminders
Ah, the mutation.

Now we come to the same level. Mutation is caused by "errors" in the DNA. But that itself is not a bad thing. Cells mutate all the time and either die, improve or grow in strange ways. A mutated cell has any given chance of each and any given chance of mutating.
So over time, the chances increase that a cell mutates, picks the "strange growth"-path and becomes cancer. That's simple mathematics.
Adding foreign substances that damage the DNA does not itself cause cancer, it simply increases the risk of a mutation.
So while some (to be honest: all) substances, as well as radiation, increase the chances of mutation it still takes time for those mutated cells to go down the strange growth-path.

The more time the DNA has to mutate and create cancer, the higher the chances that it does. Simple as that.
That does say nothing about cancer in the early years, it's just logical that time, thus age, is the main reason for cancer.

And while it might be hard for you to lose a friend while you're so young, I probably don't know you, I probably don't know your friend, so I probably don't give a shit.
Now you see, that you can call tactless, but stating something like "the main cause for cancer is age" can under no circumstances be considered tactless. And should you indeed feel offended by said statement, I refer you to "I probably don't give a shit".
 

theklng

New member
May 1, 2008
1,229
0
0
currently i'm studying software development and working towards design in games. will probably have to take a major in psychology once i get bored of design. which incidentally may never happen.
 

Carteblanche

New member
Mar 19, 2009
6
0
0
Specter_ said:
Ah, the mutation.

Now we come to the same level. Mutation is caused by "errors" in the DNA. But that itself is not a bad thing. Cells mutate all the time and either die, improve or grow in strange ways. A mutated cell has any given chance of each and any given chance of mutating.
So over time, the chances increase that a cell mutates, picks the "strange growth"-path and becomes cancer. That's simple mathematics.
Adding foreign substances that damage the DNA does not itself cause cancer, it simply increases the risk of a mutation.
So while some (to be honest: all) substances, as well as radiation, increase the chances of mutation it still takes time for those mutated cells to go down the strange growth-path.

The more time the DNA has to mutate and create cancer, the higher the chances that it does. Simple as that.
That does say nothing about cancer in the early years, it's just logical that time, thus age, is the main reason for cancer.

And while it might be hard for you to lose a friend while you're so young, I probably don't know you, I probably don't know your friend, so I probably don't give a shit.
Now you see, that you can call tactless, but stating something like "the main cause for cancer is age" can under no circumstances be considered tactless. And should you indeed feel offended by said statement, I refer you to "I probably don't give a shit".
Ah, once again your sense of self importance and undying need to be right blocks from view the fact that you seem to give very little thought into what you post.

Logical that time is the main reason for cancer?? WRONG.
think about it, the more time passes is simply more opportunities for it to occur, not the cause of it.
If you walk across a bridge everyday, its a chance to jump off of it and die, but if you actually do jump off, is the cause of it time??

And had you thought not with your ego you might have even been able to take something from this, but now i see that you are too highly opinionated of yourself, for which i do pity you, and can only hope that your tactlessness will cost you some day.

But once again i can only note that you completely avoid or miss the main point of my posts.
 

Specter_

New member
Dec 24, 2008
736
0
0
Carteblanche said:
Specter_ said:
Ah, the mutation.

Now we come to the same level. Mutation is caused by "errors" in the DNA. But that itself is not a bad thing. Cells mutate all the time and either die, improve or grow in strange ways. A mutated cell has any given chance of each and any given chance of mutating.
So over time, the chances increase that a cell mutates, picks the "strange growth"-path and becomes cancer. That's simple mathematics.
Adding foreign substances that damage the DNA does not itself cause cancer, it simply increases the risk of a mutation.
So while some (to be honest: all) substances, as well as radiation, increase the chances of mutation it still takes time for those mutated cells to go down the strange growth-path.

The more time the DNA has to mutate and create cancer, the higher the chances that it does. Simple as that.
That does say nothing about cancer in the early years, it's just logical that time, thus age, is the main reason for cancer.

And while it might be hard for you to lose a friend while you're so young, I probably don't know you, I probably don't know your friend, so I probably don't give a shit.
Now you see, that you can call tactless, but stating something like "the main cause for cancer is age" can under no circumstances be considered tactless. And should you indeed feel offended by said statement, I refer you to "I probably don't give a shit".
Ah, once again your sense of self importance and undying need to be right blocks from view the fact that you seem to give very little thought into what you post.

Logical that time is the main reason for cancer?? WRONG.
think about it, the more time passes is simply more opportunities for it to occur, not the cause of it.
If you walk across a bridge everyday, its a chance to jump off of it and die, but if you actually do jump off, is the cause of it time??

And had you thought not with your ego you might have even been able to take something from this, but now i see that you are too highly opinionated of yourself, for which i do pity you, and can only hope that your tactlessness will cost you some day.

But once again i can only note that you completely avoid or miss the main point of my posts.
To use your bridge-analogy:

If I have a probability of jumping off the bridge of 1%, after I crossed it 100 times, I might jump.
I might jump during the first crossing and I might jump during the 200th crossing, the probability is always the same. But if I cross it more often the chance of me jumping increases, since I still have to take into consideration the 1%, that's simple stochastics.

Your posts actually have a point besides telling me that I'm a selfimportant prick with a huge ego?
 

Carteblanche

New member
Mar 19, 2009
6
0
0
Specter_ said:
To use your bridge-analogy:

If I have a probability of jumping off the bridge of 1%, after I crossed it 100 times, I might jump.
I might jump during the first crossing and I might jump during the 200th crossing, the probability is always the same. But if I cross it more often the chance of me jumping increases, since I still have to take into consideration the 1%, that's simple stochastics.

Your posts actually have a point besides telling me that I'm a selfimportant prick with a huge ego?
My point with the bridge-analogy and in reply to your post is simple, your probability of jumping off of the bridge is the 1%, not the amount of times that you cross the bridge, which is my whole point, you were blaming time, im blaming the 1%.

And yes, if you took the time to reread and understand my post, is that you state things without thinking of those whom it might mean a great deal. IE a faux pass about your boss,
while you i quote "dont give a shit" it could cost you your job and future opportunities.
 

Specter_

New member
Dec 24, 2008
736
0
0
Carteblanche said:
Specter_ said:
To use your bridge-analogy:

If I have a probability of jumping off the bridge of 1%, after I crossed it 100 times, I might jump.
I might jump during the first crossing and I might jump during the 200th crossing, the probability is always the same. But if I cross it more often the chance of me jumping increases, since I still have to take into consideration the 1%, that's simple stochastics.

Your posts actually have a point besides telling me that I'm a selfimportant prick with a huge ego?
My point with the bridge-analogy and in reply to your post is simple, your probability of jumping off of the bridge is the 1%, not the amount of times that you cross the bridge, which is my whole point, you were blaming time, im blaming the 1%.

And yes, if you took the time to reread and understand my post, is that you state things without thinking of those whom it might mean a great deal. IE a faux pass about your boss,
while you i quote "dont give a shit" it could cost you your job and future opportunities.
And that gives me the impression that you are either a troll or a simpleton.

It does make things a bit harder from time to time to not care about things and people that don't concern me, but then I live pretty good with it.
Since I don't care about you, I don't care about you being mad at me. Now if you were my boss and were offended, I still wouldn't care, since I know I'm good enough at what I do that I have a certain choice about who I'm working for and I certainly do not want to work for somebody who's offended as soon as I mention cancer because he lost someone when he was 15. Bohoo, grow up, get over it.