qid int64 1 74.7M | question stringlengths 12 33.8k | date stringlengths 10 10 | metadata list | response_j stringlengths 0 115k | response_k stringlengths 2 98.3k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | I use Docear. Mind-mapping is the mode which I prefer to explore tagged (hierarchical) notes and references. The way they implement hierarchical node trees, it is effectively tagging.
The UI for building out mind maps is fast. Though there is some learning curve to overcome at the beginning, it pays off in spades when you actually index your material in a way which primes your recollection later on. It is the closest thing to augmented memory that I have found besides the Google/Wikipedia/[askubuntu]/etc. combos. =)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docear> | **[Referencer](http://packages.ubuntu.com/de/lucid/referencer)** (GNOME) is a simple tool for managing document collections.
Tagging is possible.
It tries to find metadata on arXiv or via DOI, but you can add metadata manually too, of course.
But I guess development stopped. |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | Give I, Librarian a try:
<http://i-librarian.net>
It shows PDF covers, it allows tagging, it is web-based so network access is easy and fully cross-platform. | **[Referencer](http://packages.ubuntu.com/de/lucid/referencer)** (GNOME) is a simple tool for managing document collections.
Tagging is possible.
It tries to find metadata on arXiv or via DOI, but you can add metadata manually too, of course.
But I guess development stopped. |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | I use Docear. Mind-mapping is the mode which I prefer to explore tagged (hierarchical) notes and references. The way they implement hierarchical node trees, it is effectively tagging.
The UI for building out mind maps is fast. Though there is some learning curve to overcome at the beginning, it pays off in spades when you actually index your material in a way which primes your recollection later on. It is the closest thing to augmented memory that I have found besides the Google/Wikipedia/[askubuntu]/etc. combos. =)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docear> | Have you Tried Gnome Documents?
>
> GNOME Documents is a standalone application to find, organize and view
> your documents.
>
>
>
[](https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gnome-documents) |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | I use Docear. Mind-mapping is the mode which I prefer to explore tagged (hierarchical) notes and references. The way they implement hierarchical node trees, it is effectively tagging.
The UI for building out mind maps is fast. Though there is some learning curve to overcome at the beginning, it pays off in spades when you actually index your material in a way which primes your recollection later on. It is the closest thing to augmented memory that I have found besides the Google/Wikipedia/[askubuntu]/etc. combos. =)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docear> | Give I, Librarian a try:
<http://i-librarian.net>
It shows PDF covers, it allows tagging, it is web-based so network access is easy and fully cross-platform. |
71,110 | Some people erased three author names including mine from a paper previously submitted (and rejected by three different journals) and got it accepted by Case Reports In Emergency Medicine.
I presented the publishing editor of the journal multiple clear proofs of the plagiarism. Although the journal declares that it complies with COPE, the publishing editor is dragging feet not to publish a retraction about this article despite the proofs. Instead, they are trying to overlook the situation by involving the politically driven hospital administration from where the paper was submitted from. This in turn caused violation of my rights both as a human and as a researcher. I am currently subjected to serious mobbing by the hospital administration secondary to the inconclusive behaviour of the journal. This mobbing includes the change in my workplace and an official warning because "I ruined reputation of the hospital by contacting the publishing editor".
I also sent a message to COPE but there is no response.
Would anyone suggest any further action? | 2016/06/10 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56431/"
] | Working with the editor, until that process is finished, is probably the only thing to do at first. It will undoubtedly be a long process, with delays, so patience and persistence will be necessary. Try not to let the mobbing get to you, and try to remain calm and professional at all times, despite any pressure others may exert.
If the editors, in the end, are unable to come to a resolution you accept, then the options will be (essentially) to escalate the situation or to let it go. But making an action of that kind while the editors are still working would be premature, in my opinion. | I always get down voted for saying this, but outside of Academia, if there is a very cut and dry case of someone trying to take ownership of works that you hold copyright in, then it would go to court and be handled in about a month or so (in Germany).
I appreciate that going to court is something that is considered the absolute last option in Academia, rather than the first option everywhere else, but in my opinion this is a terrible mistake. We don't tell academic's to just "research the problem and fix it yourself" when their car breaks down. We don't ask academics to "go through the correct channels" if a teacher is caught abusing a student. No, we extend our arms out to the rest of society and get the professionals to sort it out. People who are experts in dealing with these issues. But for whatever reason, many academics think that because they are intellectual, they must by default know everything there is about intellectual property law, and can handle these sorts of issues in their weekly committee meetings. Or perhaps they think they can handle the issue with more grace and finesse than the justice system. Maybe. But I have heard the same logical argument used by both the military and religious groups, who ultimately put justice secondary to some other objective - like saving face or maintaining the hierarchy of power.
Regardless of whether the journal/hospital does come to the right decision in the end, by not exercising your right as the copyright holder to justice through the justice system, you are handing unwarranted power to the publishers and academic establishment handling your case, and disenfranchising the people who have spent their lives thinking about copyright disputes and their fare/proper outcomes. All to avoid some perceived stigma over using real lawyers. |
71,110 | Some people erased three author names including mine from a paper previously submitted (and rejected by three different journals) and got it accepted by Case Reports In Emergency Medicine.
I presented the publishing editor of the journal multiple clear proofs of the plagiarism. Although the journal declares that it complies with COPE, the publishing editor is dragging feet not to publish a retraction about this article despite the proofs. Instead, they are trying to overlook the situation by involving the politically driven hospital administration from where the paper was submitted from. This in turn caused violation of my rights both as a human and as a researcher. I am currently subjected to serious mobbing by the hospital administration secondary to the inconclusive behaviour of the journal. This mobbing includes the change in my workplace and an official warning because "I ruined reputation of the hospital by contacting the publishing editor".
I also sent a message to COPE but there is no response.
Would anyone suggest any further action? | 2016/06/10 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56431/"
] | Working with the editor, until that process is finished, is probably the only thing to do at first. It will undoubtedly be a long process, with delays, so patience and persistence will be necessary. Try not to let the mobbing get to you, and try to remain calm and professional at all times, despite any pressure others may exert.
If the editors, in the end, are unable to come to a resolution you accept, then the options will be (essentially) to escalate the situation or to let it go. But making an action of that kind while the editors are still working would be premature, in my opinion. | Search for legal help from an expert in I.P. , expose them publicly and hope for the best.
This doesn't mean that you'll be able to prove the rights if you didn't took enough precautions to protect your paper and ignorance by this side is hard to prove in court.
The next time though, you can publish your own thesis/essay/book and get an ISBN with total rights and you might still be able to publish your work before it gets published since "accepted" doesn't exactly mean "released" or "printed"(this isn't clear in the question).
After years of oppression, I find this as the only way to get proper recognition since many of those cheap "book makers with ISBN" can print your work "in hours" and you can begin to spread your own knowledge at your own pace and people will think twice before abusing with your intellectual property. |
71,110 | Some people erased three author names including mine from a paper previously submitted (and rejected by three different journals) and got it accepted by Case Reports In Emergency Medicine.
I presented the publishing editor of the journal multiple clear proofs of the plagiarism. Although the journal declares that it complies with COPE, the publishing editor is dragging feet not to publish a retraction about this article despite the proofs. Instead, they are trying to overlook the situation by involving the politically driven hospital administration from where the paper was submitted from. This in turn caused violation of my rights both as a human and as a researcher. I am currently subjected to serious mobbing by the hospital administration secondary to the inconclusive behaviour of the journal. This mobbing includes the change in my workplace and an official warning because "I ruined reputation of the hospital by contacting the publishing editor".
I also sent a message to COPE but there is no response.
Would anyone suggest any further action? | 2016/06/10 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56431/"
] | I always get down voted for saying this, but outside of Academia, if there is a very cut and dry case of someone trying to take ownership of works that you hold copyright in, then it would go to court and be handled in about a month or so (in Germany).
I appreciate that going to court is something that is considered the absolute last option in Academia, rather than the first option everywhere else, but in my opinion this is a terrible mistake. We don't tell academic's to just "research the problem and fix it yourself" when their car breaks down. We don't ask academics to "go through the correct channels" if a teacher is caught abusing a student. No, we extend our arms out to the rest of society and get the professionals to sort it out. People who are experts in dealing with these issues. But for whatever reason, many academics think that because they are intellectual, they must by default know everything there is about intellectual property law, and can handle these sorts of issues in their weekly committee meetings. Or perhaps they think they can handle the issue with more grace and finesse than the justice system. Maybe. But I have heard the same logical argument used by both the military and religious groups, who ultimately put justice secondary to some other objective - like saving face or maintaining the hierarchy of power.
Regardless of whether the journal/hospital does come to the right decision in the end, by not exercising your right as the copyright holder to justice through the justice system, you are handing unwarranted power to the publishers and academic establishment handling your case, and disenfranchising the people who have spent their lives thinking about copyright disputes and their fare/proper outcomes. All to avoid some perceived stigma over using real lawyers. | Search for legal help from an expert in I.P. , expose them publicly and hope for the best.
This doesn't mean that you'll be able to prove the rights if you didn't took enough precautions to protect your paper and ignorance by this side is hard to prove in court.
The next time though, you can publish your own thesis/essay/book and get an ISBN with total rights and you might still be able to publish your work before it gets published since "accepted" doesn't exactly mean "released" or "printed"(this isn't clear in the question).
After years of oppression, I find this as the only way to get proper recognition since many of those cheap "book makers with ISBN" can print your work "in hours" and you can begin to spread your own knowledge at your own pace and people will think twice before abusing with your intellectual property. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | **Sort of (but not really) - and it's actually getting *harder* for engines to do this for you.** To understand why, you have to understand how the evaluation goes. Engines typically can make snap evaluations on a given position, giving it a raw point value. Then, whatever the position is, they play forward, trying to find the line forward that optimizes that score for both sides.
It's important to understand, that '2.0' or '1.4' score *aren't* the evaluation/score for the current position. Instead, it's the evaluation N moves down the line, with each side playing the best move the engine found. This is why the "Current evaluation score" jumps around while the computer is thinking. It's not that the 'score' for a position changed - it's just that it found a different line moving forward that ended up in a different position (which had a different score.)
In the past, engines sucked. Not just because of sub-optimal algorithms, but because of very slow hardware - if you think compounding interest is powerful, it's nothing compared to [Moore's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). So computers back then were just looking a few moves into the future. Which made it relatively easy for a human to follow the logic - your score went down because you're losing your knight the next turn.
But now? If your score went from '2.0' to '-0.3', it's possible it's because, due to some unavoidable tactics over the next 7 moves, that you'll have to give up the exchange in order to avoid losing your queen or getting checkmated. But it's hard to show the leap from "Here's the position now" and "Well, I evaluated 20 billion positions going forward, and trust me when I say that you sacrificing the rook for their bishop was the best you could hope for."
Occasionally a move from a grandmaster winning game is said to be "invisible" to a chess engine. Only after the move is made, the engine recognizes the high value of the move. This weakness in the engine could easily be remedied by more exhaustive checking of possible moves. | The engine evaluation ("2"/"1.4") is in fact very similar to how a human would evaluate a position. It is basically a sum of various factors such as *material*, *king safety*, *piece activity*, etc. evaluated not for the current position but for the position some 20 moves ahead or so; assuming perfect play from both sides.
In principle one could try to monitor the change in all those factors separately (instead of only their sum as engines do). For instance if a move leads to a lower value for "king safety" later on compared to the best move, one might be tempted to tell the learner something like: *Your last move made your king more vulnerable*
However I doubt that this would work in actual games, because:
* the learner's move might in fact have other issues: for instance it might neglect development and only because of this the player might have to make concessions later on regarding his king's protection (assuming best play).
* many factors might change at the same time, some going up some going down for instance. Trying to express this in words might be cumbersome, e.g.: *Your last move neglected king safety, but improved your piece's activity and you lost a pawn but occupied an open file* Would this information be helpful to a learner?
Because of this, I doubt that computer's will be able to teach you positional or intuitive play (based on principles) at least with current technology. Better to use classical methods such as other humans, reading/watching/listening annotated games, etc |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | @D\_M mentioned about Chessmaster, but it only reports very simple static features such as:
* Your queen is being attacked
* You lose a pawn in the computer line
* You win an exchange in the computer line
Do you know why Chessmaster did that? That's because the implementation was easy.
>
> Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
>
>
>
**NO**. Chesmaster can't do that. No software can do that. We don't have the technology to do that. Traditional engine programming techniques can't do that.
To do what your describe, we need advanced mathematics/machine learning models. I'm not aware of anything like that. | The engine evaluation ("2"/"1.4") is in fact very similar to how a human would evaluate a position. It is basically a sum of various factors such as *material*, *king safety*, *piece activity*, etc. evaluated not for the current position but for the position some 20 moves ahead or so; assuming perfect play from both sides.
In principle one could try to monitor the change in all those factors separately (instead of only their sum as engines do). For instance if a move leads to a lower value for "king safety" later on compared to the best move, one might be tempted to tell the learner something like: *Your last move made your king more vulnerable*
However I doubt that this would work in actual games, because:
* the learner's move might in fact have other issues: for instance it might neglect development and only because of this the player might have to make concessions later on regarding his king's protection (assuming best play).
* many factors might change at the same time, some going up some going down for instance. Trying to express this in words might be cumbersome, e.g.: *Your last move neglected king safety, but improved your piece's activity and you lost a pawn but occupied an open file* Would this information be helpful to a learner?
Because of this, I doubt that computer's will be able to teach you positional or intuitive play (based on principles) at least with current technology. Better to use classical methods such as other humans, reading/watching/listening annotated games, etc |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | **Sort of (but not really) - and it's actually getting *harder* for engines to do this for you.** To understand why, you have to understand how the evaluation goes. Engines typically can make snap evaluations on a given position, giving it a raw point value. Then, whatever the position is, they play forward, trying to find the line forward that optimizes that score for both sides.
It's important to understand, that '2.0' or '1.4' score *aren't* the evaluation/score for the current position. Instead, it's the evaluation N moves down the line, with each side playing the best move the engine found. This is why the "Current evaluation score" jumps around while the computer is thinking. It's not that the 'score' for a position changed - it's just that it found a different line moving forward that ended up in a different position (which had a different score.)
In the past, engines sucked. Not just because of sub-optimal algorithms, but because of very slow hardware - if you think compounding interest is powerful, it's nothing compared to [Moore's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). So computers back then were just looking a few moves into the future. Which made it relatively easy for a human to follow the logic - your score went down because you're losing your knight the next turn.
But now? If your score went from '2.0' to '-0.3', it's possible it's because, due to some unavoidable tactics over the next 7 moves, that you'll have to give up the exchange in order to avoid losing your queen or getting checkmated. But it's hard to show the leap from "Here's the position now" and "Well, I evaluated 20 billion positions going forward, and trust me when I say that you sacrificing the rook for their bishop was the best you could hope for."
Occasionally a move from a grandmaster winning game is said to be "invisible" to a chess engine. Only after the move is made, the engine recognizes the high value of the move. This weakness in the engine could easily be remedied by more exhaustive checking of possible moves. | There've been attempts to make engines explain why moves are good or bad. Here's an [example](https://app.decodechess.com/) I am aware of.
You could try clicking through the example to see how helpful it is. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | I think the chess engine can "tell" you, but in an indirect way.
What I would do is to play several different moves from the same position. The chess engine will (presumably) give you a different score for each one.
This will allow you to "rank" the various moves. Perhaps a pattern will emerge. If not, you might want to get a (stronger) human player to explain the chess engine's rankings to you. | No.
Although Chessmaster as mentioned by everyone can tell you some basic things like if the following line will result in an exchange sacrifice or you may lose a pawn and so so.
But you can also analyse this yourself by playing down the lines. There are no chess engines nor I see any in the near future that can explain why the move is good/bad unless it will cost you material difference. As a engine may have played a move to improve his position in the future say like after 50 moves. There is no way it can explain to you why this move will result in a better position after 50 moves.
Also major chess engines in the market like Stockfish etc. do not even bother to include such features as the level chess engines play at are completely different and very hard to analyse even if we are provided with explanation of every move. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | **Sort of (but not really) - and it's actually getting *harder* for engines to do this for you.** To understand why, you have to understand how the evaluation goes. Engines typically can make snap evaluations on a given position, giving it a raw point value. Then, whatever the position is, they play forward, trying to find the line forward that optimizes that score for both sides.
It's important to understand, that '2.0' or '1.4' score *aren't* the evaluation/score for the current position. Instead, it's the evaluation N moves down the line, with each side playing the best move the engine found. This is why the "Current evaluation score" jumps around while the computer is thinking. It's not that the 'score' for a position changed - it's just that it found a different line moving forward that ended up in a different position (which had a different score.)
In the past, engines sucked. Not just because of sub-optimal algorithms, but because of very slow hardware - if you think compounding interest is powerful, it's nothing compared to [Moore's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). So computers back then were just looking a few moves into the future. Which made it relatively easy for a human to follow the logic - your score went down because you're losing your knight the next turn.
But now? If your score went from '2.0' to '-0.3', it's possible it's because, due to some unavoidable tactics over the next 7 moves, that you'll have to give up the exchange in order to avoid losing your queen or getting checkmated. But it's hard to show the leap from "Here's the position now" and "Well, I evaluated 20 billion positions going forward, and trust me when I say that you sacrificing the rook for their bishop was the best you could hope for."
Occasionally a move from a grandmaster winning game is said to be "invisible" to a chess engine. Only after the move is made, the engine recognizes the high value of the move. This weakness in the engine could easily be remedied by more exhaustive checking of possible moves. | Yes, I have seen programs that attempt to explain why a move is good or bad in language. Chessmaster 9000 would do this.
Many engines will show you the best line for each move. So it can tell you that if you play g6, it expects the game to go f5 gxf5 Nxf5, whereas if you play b6 it expects the game to go a5 bxa5 Bxa5. Often from there you can see why the move was good or bad. But sometimes it's still very subtle.
There is a tool [here](https://hxim.github.io/Stockfish-Evaluation-Guide/) where you can input a position and it will tell you exactly why Stockfish evaluates the position the way it does. It only works for a static position (it doesn't look ahead at all), but it's still interesting. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | **Sort of (but not really) - and it's actually getting *harder* for engines to do this for you.** To understand why, you have to understand how the evaluation goes. Engines typically can make snap evaluations on a given position, giving it a raw point value. Then, whatever the position is, they play forward, trying to find the line forward that optimizes that score for both sides.
It's important to understand, that '2.0' or '1.4' score *aren't* the evaluation/score for the current position. Instead, it's the evaluation N moves down the line, with each side playing the best move the engine found. This is why the "Current evaluation score" jumps around while the computer is thinking. It's not that the 'score' for a position changed - it's just that it found a different line moving forward that ended up in a different position (which had a different score.)
In the past, engines sucked. Not just because of sub-optimal algorithms, but because of very slow hardware - if you think compounding interest is powerful, it's nothing compared to [Moore's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). So computers back then were just looking a few moves into the future. Which made it relatively easy for a human to follow the logic - your score went down because you're losing your knight the next turn.
But now? If your score went from '2.0' to '-0.3', it's possible it's because, due to some unavoidable tactics over the next 7 moves, that you'll have to give up the exchange in order to avoid losing your queen or getting checkmated. But it's hard to show the leap from "Here's the position now" and "Well, I evaluated 20 billion positions going forward, and trust me when I say that you sacrificing the rook for their bishop was the best you could hope for."
Occasionally a move from a grandmaster winning game is said to be "invisible" to a chess engine. Only after the move is made, the engine recognizes the high value of the move. This weakness in the engine could easily be remedied by more exhaustive checking of possible moves. | In addition to other answers, engines don't assess positions like humans, so they can't provide a good explanation why *they think* your move is inferior (emphasis on they think, not necessarily).
But you can follow sidelines using engine suggestions and understand why it was inferior. At least this is what I do.
Could there be an engine which can do this? I guess yes, but from business point of view, probably, an infeasibly huge effort is necessary. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | Yes, I have seen programs that attempt to explain why a move is good or bad in language. Chessmaster 9000 would do this.
Many engines will show you the best line for each move. So it can tell you that if you play g6, it expects the game to go f5 gxf5 Nxf5, whereas if you play b6 it expects the game to go a5 bxa5 Bxa5. Often from there you can see why the move was good or bad. But sometimes it's still very subtle.
There is a tool [here](https://hxim.github.io/Stockfish-Evaluation-Guide/) where you can input a position and it will tell you exactly why Stockfish evaluates the position the way it does. It only works for a static position (it doesn't look ahead at all), but it's still interesting. | The engine evaluation ("2"/"1.4") is in fact very similar to how a human would evaluate a position. It is basically a sum of various factors such as *material*, *king safety*, *piece activity*, etc. evaluated not for the current position but for the position some 20 moves ahead or so; assuming perfect play from both sides.
In principle one could try to monitor the change in all those factors separately (instead of only their sum as engines do). For instance if a move leads to a lower value for "king safety" later on compared to the best move, one might be tempted to tell the learner something like: *Your last move made your king more vulnerable*
However I doubt that this would work in actual games, because:
* the learner's move might in fact have other issues: for instance it might neglect development and only because of this the player might have to make concessions later on regarding his king's protection (assuming best play).
* many factors might change at the same time, some going up some going down for instance. Trying to express this in words might be cumbersome, e.g.: *Your last move neglected king safety, but improved your piece's activity and you lost a pawn but occupied an open file* Would this information be helpful to a learner?
Because of this, I doubt that computer's will be able to teach you positional or intuitive play (based on principles) at least with current technology. Better to use classical methods such as other humans, reading/watching/listening annotated games, etc |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | Yes, I have seen programs that attempt to explain why a move is good or bad in language. Chessmaster 9000 would do this.
Many engines will show you the best line for each move. So it can tell you that if you play g6, it expects the game to go f5 gxf5 Nxf5, whereas if you play b6 it expects the game to go a5 bxa5 Bxa5. Often from there you can see why the move was good or bad. But sometimes it's still very subtle.
There is a tool [here](https://hxim.github.io/Stockfish-Evaluation-Guide/) where you can input a position and it will tell you exactly why Stockfish evaluates the position the way it does. It only works for a static position (it doesn't look ahead at all), but it's still interesting. | No.
Although Chessmaster as mentioned by everyone can tell you some basic things like if the following line will result in an exchange sacrifice or you may lose a pawn and so so.
But you can also analyse this yourself by playing down the lines. There are no chess engines nor I see any in the near future that can explain why the move is good/bad unless it will cost you material difference. As a engine may have played a move to improve his position in the future say like after 50 moves. There is no way it can explain to you why this move will result in a better position after 50 moves.
Also major chess engines in the market like Stockfish etc. do not even bother to include such features as the level chess engines play at are completely different and very hard to analyse even if we are provided with explanation of every move. |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | I think the chess engine can "tell" you, but in an indirect way.
What I would do is to play several different moves from the same position. The chess engine will (presumably) give you a different score for each one.
This will allow you to "rank" the various moves. Perhaps a pattern will emerge. If not, you might want to get a (stronger) human player to explain the chess engine's rankings to you. | The engine evaluation ("2"/"1.4") is in fact very similar to how a human would evaluate a position. It is basically a sum of various factors such as *material*, *king safety*, *piece activity*, etc. evaluated not for the current position but for the position some 20 moves ahead or so; assuming perfect play from both sides.
In principle one could try to monitor the change in all those factors separately (instead of only their sum as engines do). For instance if a move leads to a lower value for "king safety" later on compared to the best move, one might be tempted to tell the learner something like: *Your last move made your king more vulnerable*
However I doubt that this would work in actual games, because:
* the learner's move might in fact have other issues: for instance it might neglect development and only because of this the player might have to make concessions later on regarding his king's protection (assuming best play).
* many factors might change at the same time, some going up some going down for instance. Trying to express this in words might be cumbersome, e.g.: *Your last move neglected king safety, but improved your piece's activity and you lost a pawn but occupied an open file* Would this information be helpful to a learner?
Because of this, I doubt that computer's will be able to teach you positional or intuitive play (based on principles) at least with current technology. Better to use classical methods such as other humans, reading/watching/listening annotated games, etc |
18,979 | Can any chess engine tell you why a move is bad or good? For example, say a chess engine says the score against my opponent is currently +2 in my favor. I then make a move and my score drops to say 1.4. Can any engine tell me what I did wrong such that my score dropped from 2 to 1.4 (assuming I didn't hang a piece or pawn etc.)
It seems to me that having chess programmers make their programs even stronger is now pointless and it would be much more beneficial to the average chess player if they could have their programs instruct us why a move is bad (or good), assuming they currently cannot do this. | 2017/10/29 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/18979",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/443/"
] | **Sort of (but not really) - and it's actually getting *harder* for engines to do this for you.** To understand why, you have to understand how the evaluation goes. Engines typically can make snap evaluations on a given position, giving it a raw point value. Then, whatever the position is, they play forward, trying to find the line forward that optimizes that score for both sides.
It's important to understand, that '2.0' or '1.4' score *aren't* the evaluation/score for the current position. Instead, it's the evaluation N moves down the line, with each side playing the best move the engine found. This is why the "Current evaluation score" jumps around while the computer is thinking. It's not that the 'score' for a position changed - it's just that it found a different line moving forward that ended up in a different position (which had a different score.)
In the past, engines sucked. Not just because of sub-optimal algorithms, but because of very slow hardware - if you think compounding interest is powerful, it's nothing compared to [Moore's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law). So computers back then were just looking a few moves into the future. Which made it relatively easy for a human to follow the logic - your score went down because you're losing your knight the next turn.
But now? If your score went from '2.0' to '-0.3', it's possible it's because, due to some unavoidable tactics over the next 7 moves, that you'll have to give up the exchange in order to avoid losing your queen or getting checkmated. But it's hard to show the leap from "Here's the position now" and "Well, I evaluated 20 billion positions going forward, and trust me when I say that you sacrificing the rook for their bishop was the best you could hope for."
Occasionally a move from a grandmaster winning game is said to be "invisible" to a chess engine. Only after the move is made, the engine recognizes the high value of the move. This weakness in the engine could easily be remedied by more exhaustive checking of possible moves. | I think the chess engine can "tell" you, but in an indirect way.
What I would do is to play several different moves from the same position. The chess engine will (presumably) give you a different score for each one.
This will allow you to "rank" the various moves. Perhaps a pattern will emerge. If not, you might want to get a (stronger) human player to explain the chess engine's rankings to you. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | There are several possibilities. Some may be appropriate. Some may work. Or not.
**Avoidance**. If possible, just avoid this person. Don't have anything to do with him. Difficult, I know. There are probably limited options to do that.
**Ignore his taunts**. My guess is that he disgraces himself when he does this. If he does this publicly, other students probably see it for what it is. But a public, angry, response from you would probably do yourself more harm than it is worth.
**Formal Complaint**. This will have consequences all 'round, but might be effective. His department chair might be interested to hear what you have to say, especially if the professor is un-tenured. But a complaint from a group of students would be more effective than one from a single student. And make the complaint in person or using a formal mail. Email is too easy to ignore, for this.
Try not to feel bad. The actions of the prof are inexcusable and aren't due to anything in you or that you can actually correct. Know it for what it is: unprofessional behavior. | It would appear that he is trying to shame you to make himself feel better. This is not unusual behaviour, though you would hope for better from a senior academic. One solution is to call him on it enough to stop it but not enough to make an enemy of him:
"Yes, my GPA was indeed 3.0. That seems to have really caught your attention because you've mentioned it the last 9 times we've met."
I would not try to emphasis that you are getting great grades now. The important bit is to call him on his GPA-focus, particularly if there are other people around. Do it in a manner which suggests that you are genuinely curious about why he is mentioning it, rather than letting him know that it irks you. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | As I understand you, you are being *publicly* shamed (in front of fellow grad students) by this professor by dint of your undergrad record.
If you are in the US, this is violating FERPA by revealing your academic record. Other countries have similar privacy laws. File a FERPA complaint and wipe that smug smile off his face.
I'm no expert and I suspect each school is different. But this is a federal law and I think most schools would take such a blatant violation seriously. I'm pretty sure this prof would get his leash yanked pretty hard.
Note that it could backfire. You could an enemy who will make your graduate experience miserable. But I'm betting against it. There have been a number of times when I just let a jerk be a jerk because I thought my life would go more smoothly, but found out later that if I had stood up for myself, I would have gotten a standing ovation from 99% of the people around me. This prof is a jerk and his colleagues will likely appreciate him being called out.
Also, in the case of harassment and rights violations, the perpetrator is warned against retaliation in any form. And someone will be watching for it. Someone behind those closed doors will tattle. I think you are perfectly safe.
### My experience
When I taught small classes, I would write all the test scores on the board, so that students could see where they ranked. One young lady thought I was violating FERPA with this tattled on me. I got hauled into the chairs office where he was accompanied with one of those university JD types (the law students who never pass the bar, but get jobs at universities being annoying.) and the dean. They were ready to have a field day with me. They had already talked to other students and had corroboration that I had, in fact, written all the scores on the board. The JD was salivating.
We talked at cross purposes for a while, then they figured out that I was writing numbers only. No names. No personal information was being displayed. They were so disappointed. An administrator gets to be administrative so rarely and here they had an open-and-shut case go up in smoke.
So the point here is that at this school at this time, FERPA violations were a big deal. I suspect that in the current safe-room environment, they might be a bigger deal. Telling the class that that guy right there has a low GPA could traumatize him for life, eh? | It would appear that he is trying to shame you to make himself feel better. This is not unusual behaviour, though you would hope for better from a senior academic. One solution is to call him on it enough to stop it but not enough to make an enemy of him:
"Yes, my GPA was indeed 3.0. That seems to have really caught your attention because you've mentioned it the last 9 times we've met."
I would not try to emphasis that you are getting great grades now. The important bit is to call him on his GPA-focus, particularly if there are other people around. Do it in a manner which suggests that you are genuinely curious about why he is mentioning it, rather than letting him know that it irks you. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | I've gone through this nonsense before. Here is an interaction I had with one of my professors regarding an assignment I had in college, around 20 years ago:
>
> Me: Sir, I know what pride is but what is prejudice?
>
> Him: Prejudice means, "what I have against you"
>
>
>
Best part is, I still did not understand.
That professor is looking for a reaction from you. Detach from the negative experience, don't react negatively and you will stop the very thing that feeds their ego.
You have to attack the core of his belief system. | It would appear that he is trying to shame you to make himself feel better. This is not unusual behaviour, though you would hope for better from a senior academic. One solution is to call him on it enough to stop it but not enough to make an enemy of him:
"Yes, my GPA was indeed 3.0. That seems to have really caught your attention because you've mentioned it the last 9 times we've met."
I would not try to emphasis that you are getting great grades now. The important bit is to call him on his GPA-focus, particularly if there are other people around. Do it in a manner which suggests that you are genuinely curious about why he is mentioning it, rather than letting him know that it irks you. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | Seek advice from a trusted mentor.
If you have another professor or advisor who you believe you can speak to about this, I would encourage you to explore that option. Not only is it important to have a positive influence to counteract the negative impact of this professor in your personal development, but quality mentorship is also a component in your future career success.
A mentor who has already passed these trials and tribulations in their career may have very well witnessed and experienced these same behaviors. They can offer a more informed plan for how to treat this with your best interests in mind. What your mentor advises may boil down to the same options @Buffy has laid-out. In the case that you should choose formal action, a mentor supporting you in this could be very influential in how it concludes.
One of the unfortunate realities of academia currently is that institutional mechanisms to discourage and rectify this type of behavior are (in my opinion) rare and frequently ineffective. For better or worse, your professors often have an inordinate amount of influence on your career once you are at the graduate level. For this reason, it's really difficult for a student to utilize formal recourse options. Some schools do have specific [anti-bullying resources](https://graduateschool.vt.edu/student-life/we-hear-your-voice/disrupting_academic_bullying.html), and you should investigate if these exist at your institution. | I feel you have to be careful not to go nuclear, because if he is your professor you have to be careful not to move from "annoyance" to "threat" in his eyes, given he presumably grades your work. However, it seems like he's already put himself in a bad position since you said he "tries ... to humiliate me in front of other professors", not just in class.
I believe to reduce risk of this going nuclear, you have to present as though you're concerned and not accusing.
So go to his boss. Say you're trying to look out for the organisation as a whole. Point out he's breaching privacy laws by repeatedly bringing this up in front of other professors, and if anyone makes an official complaint for any reason then things aren't going to end well for anyone. Ask his boss if they can have a quiet word to "nip this in the bud" and mitigate reputational risk to the organisation, and by implication also to this guy's boss.
Play up your concern for the organisation and try not to get personal. Mention some of the other staff members he's done this in front of. Stress that you believe it's better for all concerned if this just quietly stops happening.
Afterwards, write down what you believe was discussed in the meeting as clearly and succinctly as you can. Send an email to the person you've just met with, thanking them for their time and including your notes on the "informal meeting" (that is, you're explicitly not making a formal complaint right now) "just for their reference" and to "clear things up if I misinterpreted or misunderstood anything".
Assuming this person's boss doesn't argue your email, you've now established yourself on record as trying to deal with it quietly without reputational risk to the organisation. If it escalates or you need to file a formal complaint later, you've established the moral high ground. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | As I understand you, you are being *publicly* shamed (in front of fellow grad students) by this professor by dint of your undergrad record.
If you are in the US, this is violating FERPA by revealing your academic record. Other countries have similar privacy laws. File a FERPA complaint and wipe that smug smile off his face.
I'm no expert and I suspect each school is different. But this is a federal law and I think most schools would take such a blatant violation seriously. I'm pretty sure this prof would get his leash yanked pretty hard.
Note that it could backfire. You could an enemy who will make your graduate experience miserable. But I'm betting against it. There have been a number of times when I just let a jerk be a jerk because I thought my life would go more smoothly, but found out later that if I had stood up for myself, I would have gotten a standing ovation from 99% of the people around me. This prof is a jerk and his colleagues will likely appreciate him being called out.
Also, in the case of harassment and rights violations, the perpetrator is warned against retaliation in any form. And someone will be watching for it. Someone behind those closed doors will tattle. I think you are perfectly safe.
### My experience
When I taught small classes, I would write all the test scores on the board, so that students could see where they ranked. One young lady thought I was violating FERPA with this tattled on me. I got hauled into the chairs office where he was accompanied with one of those university JD types (the law students who never pass the bar, but get jobs at universities being annoying.) and the dean. They were ready to have a field day with me. They had already talked to other students and had corroboration that I had, in fact, written all the scores on the board. The JD was salivating.
We talked at cross purposes for a while, then they figured out that I was writing numbers only. No names. No personal information was being displayed. They were so disappointed. An administrator gets to be administrative so rarely and here they had an open-and-shut case go up in smoke.
So the point here is that at this school at this time, FERPA violations were a big deal. I suspect that in the current safe-room environment, they might be a bigger deal. Telling the class that that guy right there has a low GPA could traumatize him for life, eh? | Seek advice from a trusted mentor.
If you have another professor or advisor who you believe you can speak to about this, I would encourage you to explore that option. Not only is it important to have a positive influence to counteract the negative impact of this professor in your personal development, but quality mentorship is also a component in your future career success.
A mentor who has already passed these trials and tribulations in their career may have very well witnessed and experienced these same behaviors. They can offer a more informed plan for how to treat this with your best interests in mind. What your mentor advises may boil down to the same options @Buffy has laid-out. In the case that you should choose formal action, a mentor supporting you in this could be very influential in how it concludes.
One of the unfortunate realities of academia currently is that institutional mechanisms to discourage and rectify this type of behavior are (in my opinion) rare and frequently ineffective. For better or worse, your professors often have an inordinate amount of influence on your career once you are at the graduate level. For this reason, it's really difficult for a student to utilize formal recourse options. Some schools do have specific [anti-bullying resources](https://graduateschool.vt.edu/student-life/we-hear-your-voice/disrupting_academic_bullying.html), and you should investigate if these exist at your institution. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | Seek advice from a trusted mentor.
If you have another professor or advisor who you believe you can speak to about this, I would encourage you to explore that option. Not only is it important to have a positive influence to counteract the negative impact of this professor in your personal development, but quality mentorship is also a component in your future career success.
A mentor who has already passed these trials and tribulations in their career may have very well witnessed and experienced these same behaviors. They can offer a more informed plan for how to treat this with your best interests in mind. What your mentor advises may boil down to the same options @Buffy has laid-out. In the case that you should choose formal action, a mentor supporting you in this could be very influential in how it concludes.
One of the unfortunate realities of academia currently is that institutional mechanisms to discourage and rectify this type of behavior are (in my opinion) rare and frequently ineffective. For better or worse, your professors often have an inordinate amount of influence on your career once you are at the graduate level. For this reason, it's really difficult for a student to utilize formal recourse options. Some schools do have specific [anti-bullying resources](https://graduateschool.vt.edu/student-life/we-hear-your-voice/disrupting_academic_bullying.html), and you should investigate if these exist at your institution. | It would appear that he is trying to shame you to make himself feel better. This is not unusual behaviour, though you would hope for better from a senior academic. One solution is to call him on it enough to stop it but not enough to make an enemy of him:
"Yes, my GPA was indeed 3.0. That seems to have really caught your attention because you've mentioned it the last 9 times we've met."
I would not try to emphasis that you are getting great grades now. The important bit is to call him on his GPA-focus, particularly if there are other people around. Do it in a manner which suggests that you are genuinely curious about why he is mentioning it, rather than letting him know that it irks you. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | Seek advice from a trusted mentor.
If you have another professor or advisor who you believe you can speak to about this, I would encourage you to explore that option. Not only is it important to have a positive influence to counteract the negative impact of this professor in your personal development, but quality mentorship is also a component in your future career success.
A mentor who has already passed these trials and tribulations in their career may have very well witnessed and experienced these same behaviors. They can offer a more informed plan for how to treat this with your best interests in mind. What your mentor advises may boil down to the same options @Buffy has laid-out. In the case that you should choose formal action, a mentor supporting you in this could be very influential in how it concludes.
One of the unfortunate realities of academia currently is that institutional mechanisms to discourage and rectify this type of behavior are (in my opinion) rare and frequently ineffective. For better or worse, your professors often have an inordinate amount of influence on your career once you are at the graduate level. For this reason, it's really difficult for a student to utilize formal recourse options. Some schools do have specific [anti-bullying resources](https://graduateschool.vt.edu/student-life/we-hear-your-voice/disrupting_academic_bullying.html), and you should investigate if these exist at your institution. | I will copy on [B.Goddard's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/120346/9200) - wipe the arrogant smile off their face.
On the other hand, this will backfire to you in a matter of seconds, maybe sooner. So be ready for that.
* File as many instances as you can of when you were mocked by that professor.
* Look for a different advisor, discuss your issue with them honestly. (Do not mention the mocker's name until directly asked for it)
* Look for a different university to minimise the mocker's/bully's options to interfere with your career.
With the backup plan go for the complaint and leave. Take your lesson and forget about this professor.
It is highly probable that you were not the only one to be bullied by this professor so there is a chance you will start an avalanche of complaints against them. This might lead not only to wipe the smile off their face but to wipe them off their position as well. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | There are several possibilities. Some may be appropriate. Some may work. Or not.
**Avoidance**. If possible, just avoid this person. Don't have anything to do with him. Difficult, I know. There are probably limited options to do that.
**Ignore his taunts**. My guess is that he disgraces himself when he does this. If he does this publicly, other students probably see it for what it is. But a public, angry, response from you would probably do yourself more harm than it is worth.
**Formal Complaint**. This will have consequences all 'round, but might be effective. His department chair might be interested to hear what you have to say, especially if the professor is un-tenured. But a complaint from a group of students would be more effective than one from a single student. And make the complaint in person or using a formal mail. Email is too easy to ignore, for this.
Try not to feel bad. The actions of the prof are inexcusable and aren't due to anything in you or that you can actually correct. Know it for what it is: unprofessional behavior. | I feel you have to be careful not to go nuclear, because if he is your professor you have to be careful not to move from "annoyance" to "threat" in his eyes, given he presumably grades your work. However, it seems like he's already put himself in a bad position since you said he "tries ... to humiliate me in front of other professors", not just in class.
I believe to reduce risk of this going nuclear, you have to present as though you're concerned and not accusing.
So go to his boss. Say you're trying to look out for the organisation as a whole. Point out he's breaching privacy laws by repeatedly bringing this up in front of other professors, and if anyone makes an official complaint for any reason then things aren't going to end well for anyone. Ask his boss if they can have a quiet word to "nip this in the bud" and mitigate reputational risk to the organisation, and by implication also to this guy's boss.
Play up your concern for the organisation and try not to get personal. Mention some of the other staff members he's done this in front of. Stress that you believe it's better for all concerned if this just quietly stops happening.
Afterwards, write down what you believe was discussed in the meeting as clearly and succinctly as you can. Send an email to the person you've just met with, thanking them for their time and including your notes on the "informal meeting" (that is, you're explicitly not making a formal complaint right now) "just for their reference" and to "clear things up if I misinterpreted or misunderstood anything".
Assuming this person's boss doesn't argue your email, you've now established yourself on record as trying to deal with it quietly without reputational risk to the organisation. If it escalates or you need to file a formal complaint later, you've established the moral high ground. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | As I understand you, you are being *publicly* shamed (in front of fellow grad students) by this professor by dint of your undergrad record.
If you are in the US, this is violating FERPA by revealing your academic record. Other countries have similar privacy laws. File a FERPA complaint and wipe that smug smile off his face.
I'm no expert and I suspect each school is different. But this is a federal law and I think most schools would take such a blatant violation seriously. I'm pretty sure this prof would get his leash yanked pretty hard.
Note that it could backfire. You could an enemy who will make your graduate experience miserable. But I'm betting against it. There have been a number of times when I just let a jerk be a jerk because I thought my life would go more smoothly, but found out later that if I had stood up for myself, I would have gotten a standing ovation from 99% of the people around me. This prof is a jerk and his colleagues will likely appreciate him being called out.
Also, in the case of harassment and rights violations, the perpetrator is warned against retaliation in any form. And someone will be watching for it. Someone behind those closed doors will tattle. I think you are perfectly safe.
### My experience
When I taught small classes, I would write all the test scores on the board, so that students could see where they ranked. One young lady thought I was violating FERPA with this tattled on me. I got hauled into the chairs office where he was accompanied with one of those university JD types (the law students who never pass the bar, but get jobs at universities being annoying.) and the dean. They were ready to have a field day with me. They had already talked to other students and had corroboration that I had, in fact, written all the scores on the board. The JD was salivating.
We talked at cross purposes for a while, then they figured out that I was writing numbers only. No names. No personal information was being displayed. They were so disappointed. An administrator gets to be administrative so rarely and here they had an open-and-shut case go up in smoke.
So the point here is that at this school at this time, FERPA violations were a big deal. I suspect that in the current safe-room environment, they might be a bigger deal. Telling the class that that guy right there has a low GPA could traumatize him for life, eh? | I feel you have to be careful not to go nuclear, because if he is your professor you have to be careful not to move from "annoyance" to "threat" in his eyes, given he presumably grades your work. However, it seems like he's already put himself in a bad position since you said he "tries ... to humiliate me in front of other professors", not just in class.
I believe to reduce risk of this going nuclear, you have to present as though you're concerned and not accusing.
So go to his boss. Say you're trying to look out for the organisation as a whole. Point out he's breaching privacy laws by repeatedly bringing this up in front of other professors, and if anyone makes an official complaint for any reason then things aren't going to end well for anyone. Ask his boss if they can have a quiet word to "nip this in the bud" and mitigate reputational risk to the organisation, and by implication also to this guy's boss.
Play up your concern for the organisation and try not to get personal. Mention some of the other staff members he's done this in front of. Stress that you believe it's better for all concerned if this just quietly stops happening.
Afterwards, write down what you believe was discussed in the meeting as clearly and succinctly as you can. Send an email to the person you've just met with, thanking them for their time and including your notes on the "informal meeting" (that is, you're explicitly not making a formal complaint right now) "just for their reference" and to "clear things up if I misinterpreted or misunderstood anything".
Assuming this person's boss doesn't argue your email, you've now established yourself on record as trying to deal with it quietly without reputational risk to the organisation. If it escalates or you need to file a formal complaint later, you've established the moral high ground. |
120,326 | I am a beginning graduate student in Mathematics. I have a professor who always brings up the fact that my GPA is not great in my undergraduate degree even though my performance is above the norm in the institution I am enrolled at the moment, so far I got straight A's in the graduate courses that I have completed. He always tries to point out at my flaws in my undergraduate years to humiliate me in front of other professors and my colleagues. What would be a wise reply/reaction to such abuse?
I feel bad about it cause I feel like I am harassed and I don't reply.
I am also currently taking a course with that professor. | 2018/11/19 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99012/"
] | Maybe you could be interested in Non Violent Communication.
From wikipedia:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication>
>
> It is based on the idea that all human beings have the capacity for compassion and only resort to violence or behavior that harms themselves and others when they do not recognize more effective strategies for meeting needs.
> Habits of thinking and speaking that lead to the use of violence (social, psychological and physical) are learned through culture. NVC theory supposes all human behavior stems from attempts to meet universal human needs and that these needs are never in conflict. Rather, conflict arises when strategies for meeting needs clash. NVC proposes that people identify shared needs, revealed by the thoughts and feelings that surround these needs, and collaborate to develop strategies that meet them. This creates both harmony and learning for future cooperation.
>
>
>
The idea behind this is that the behavior of the professor is, in some kind of way, the expression of an unmet need. This perception can help you to externalize the problem from yourself and to get out of the mental game.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LuPCAh9FCc> | It would appear that he is trying to shame you to make himself feel better. This is not unusual behaviour, though you would hope for better from a senior academic. One solution is to call him on it enough to stop it but not enough to make an enemy of him:
"Yes, my GPA was indeed 3.0. That seems to have really caught your attention because you've mentioned it the last 9 times we've met."
I would not try to emphasis that you are getting great grades now. The important bit is to call him on his GPA-focus, particularly if there are other people around. Do it in a manner which suggests that you are genuinely curious about why he is mentioning it, rather than letting him know that it irks you. |
33,182 | I'm currently getting to grips with the new (3.1) ArcGIS JavaScript API and how it bundles Dojo and relies on Dojo's Asynchronous Module Definition (AMD) approach.
I'm familiar with AMD and recently completed a project using Require, Backbone, and OpenLayers in combination - overall a very pleasant experience.
However I'm worried by
* how tightly-coupled Dojo is with the ArcGIS JavaScript API,
* that trying to use Require instead of Dojo AMD throws an exception, and
* that Dojo AMD doesn't seem to have the same user-base and momentum as Require, making it difficult to research / resolve problems without hitting the forums
My main concern is that I will write an ArcGIS JavaScript API application and not be able to build / package it into a single / small number of scripts. This will leave me with an application making 100+ HTTP requests at startup for all of the modules it depends on.
I've seen [this article](http://odoe.net/blog/?p=307) covering 3.0 but it doesn't mention the build process and I believe 3.0 is quite different. I've also seen [this piece](http://geospatialscott.blogspot.ca/2011/06/using-dojo-build-system-to-speed-up.html) on building / packaging an application that uses the ArcGIS JavaScript API but the comments suggest this is pre-Dojo 1.7 AMD.
Have ESRI really only half implemented the AMD approach, and in a way that will actually make my application slower? Why can I not find ESRI documentation on building / packaging a JavaScript API-based application?
Any thoughts or experience here would be much appreciated.
**EDIT** Based on the answers so far it seems that no, ESRI hasn't provided any information on building your Dojo application after inflating the number of scripts involved. It seems the only useful information available is from non-official sources and slightly outdated (enough to cause problems). This leads to me wonder why more people aren't vocal about the API's new improvements / deficiencies
* am I being too critical / demanding in expecting some more information here?
* is no one using the latest version of the API?
* should I use an older version of the API that doesn't depend on AMD? | 2012/09/11 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/33182",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/2788/"
] | Since esri does not ship source code you cannot build one layer package with all your classes. You will have to push out the esri api locally or using the CDN and then pull down your layer file. So you will have 2 and then the extra's that esri forgot to bundle or chose not to.
We've put together a discard layer so that you don't duplicate packages within your own built layer file and the esri layer file. This is pre AMD but as you've noticed, AMD is only partially implemented in the current version of the API.
[This blog post](http://geospatialscott.blogspot.com/2011/06/using-dojo-build-system-to-speed-up.html) will outline everything you need to know and the concept will apply for newer versions.
the freenode irc chatroom #dojo has great realtime information if you dont' want to wait around for the forum. | while ago I was wondering the same question. But on last Esri Developer Summit 2012 I saw a presentation about JS api. Person that was presenting the subject explained how to create basic OO dojo plugin/module. You can watch whole video here: <http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/devsummit12/index.html> |
12,088 | Which book is more a beginner to learn to program in c++ (or GML) and more fun: "Game Maker 8 Cookbook" (available for pre-order), or "The Game Maker's Companion" ? | 2011/05/09 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/12088",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/7193/"
] | I created a game in Game Maker long ago, and was frustrated with the lack of control over many of the game elements. They try to take the programming out of game making. So I'm afraid you won't find Game Maker to be much help if you're trying to learn C++, or really programming in general.
I would recommend going with [Beginning C++ Through Game Programming, Third Edition](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1435457420) if you want to achieve your intended goal. | I don't think either of them look all that great, and certainly they don't appear to teach C++ at all (focusing instead entirely on Game Maker and GML, it's internal language).
"Cookbook" style books tend to be more focused around isolated, individual techniques rather than providing a unifying educational "narrative," so I would shy away from the "Game Maker 8 Cookbook" entirely if that's what you are looking for.
Additionally, "The Game Maker's Companion" is a follow-up, so perhaps the first book in the series, [The Game Maker's Apprentice](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1590596153) is a better choice overall. |
12,088 | Which book is more a beginner to learn to program in c++ (or GML) and more fun: "Game Maker 8 Cookbook" (available for pre-order), or "The Game Maker's Companion" ? | 2011/05/09 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/12088",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/7193/"
] | I created a game in Game Maker long ago, and was frustrated with the lack of control over many of the game elements. They try to take the programming out of game making. So I'm afraid you won't find Game Maker to be much help if you're trying to learn C++, or really programming in general.
I would recommend going with [Beginning C++ Through Game Programming, Third Edition](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1435457420) if you want to achieve your intended goal. | Both books will teach you Game Maker's drag and drop, neither will teach you C++.
Im not sure if the cookbook teaches you GML, though i know the companion does.
Both books have their own style of teaching. So on that matter, purely subjective.
The Cookbook is slightly cheaper (thought not much)
The Companion is out already.
The companion might (i'm not positive) require you to get the game makers apprentice as well.
Overall i would say companion. The sooner the better, and it will teach everything you need to get started. The Game Makers apprentice might be needed first though.
And regarding C++... Well thats a totally different area. If you want to jump straight into it, neither of these books will help. However if you want to learn the basics of using logic to do things before delving into the details of the language, well it might help to learn GML first. |
389,953 | You often *plunge* into the sea or *plunge* you hands into your pockets.
Can the word be used to describe a "horizontal immersion"?
Example sentence:
>
> She opened the door and **plunged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
If not, what's a more appropriate word? | 2017/05/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/389953",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/202294/"
] | It's perfectly acceptable, but you might want to consider the "literal baggage," for lack of a better word, that the figurative term carries with it.
Take the OED literal definition that this derives from:
>
> To thrust, throw, or drop into or in a liquid, penetrable substance, deep pit, container, etc.; to immerse, to submerge.
>
>
>
In any case that you use the word "plunge," readers will associate it with the literal meaning to derive its figurative meaning. If you want to invoke feelings of falling deep into something, then it's appropriate. Just be aware that the use **ordinarily** refers to falling or pushing *in a downward direction*. | Almost all definitions of Plunging seem to imply that it's a word describing vertical descent.
[Merriam Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/plunge) thesaurus includes the following words as related:
>
> dip, immersion, submersion; fall, plump, slip, spill, stumble, tumble; descent, drop; belly flop, header, jackknife, swan dive
>
>
>
None of them indicating a horizontal direction.
Also, [Thesaurus](http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/plunging) synonyms imply a vertical nature.
It may be acceptable to use *plunging* in the sentence but you may not get the intended effect on a reader.
Maybe the following will suit better
>
> She opened the door and **stepped** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
or
>
> She opened the door and **charged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
> |
389,953 | You often *plunge* into the sea or *plunge* you hands into your pockets.
Can the word be used to describe a "horizontal immersion"?
Example sentence:
>
> She opened the door and **plunged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
If not, what's a more appropriate word? | 2017/05/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/389953",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/202294/"
] | It's perfectly acceptable, but you might want to consider the "literal baggage," for lack of a better word, that the figurative term carries with it.
Take the OED literal definition that this derives from:
>
> To thrust, throw, or drop into or in a liquid, penetrable substance, deep pit, container, etc.; to immerse, to submerge.
>
>
>
In any case that you use the word "plunge," readers will associate it with the literal meaning to derive its figurative meaning. If you want to invoke feelings of falling deep into something, then it's appropriate. Just be aware that the use **ordinarily** refers to falling or pushing *in a downward direction*. | "Plunged" is a good word to use, but "sunlight" would be much better then "sun".
Otherwise, you could say "emerged" into the sunlight.
One historical example shows both "plunged" and "emerged" would be good choices:
[Reports of Observations of the Total Eclipse of the Sun, August 7, 1869](https://books.google.com/books?id=c00QPyT2IjMC&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=%22plunged%20into%20%22%20sunlight&source=bl&ots=WqTGBpgo99&sig=zznbtkA2vX7fQjSBLuwgE1CF9vY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjT0aK25vvTAhUF6yYKHaqOBnkQ6AEIUTAI#v=onepage&q=%22plunged%20into%20%22%20sunlight&f=false):
>
> ...observed with what frightful rapidity we were plunged into the dark shadow, and the contrary effect as we emerged into sunlight
>
>
> |
389,953 | You often *plunge* into the sea or *plunge* you hands into your pockets.
Can the word be used to describe a "horizontal immersion"?
Example sentence:
>
> She opened the door and **plunged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
If not, what's a more appropriate word? | 2017/05/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/389953",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/202294/"
] | The OED's first meaning of ***plunge*** involves transitively thrusting, throwing or dropping something (or oneself) into a liquid - from the French ***plonger*** - *to jump into water, to submerge, or sink*
However, sense 4 (intransitive) of the verb covers precisely the circumstance you relate:
>
> 4. intr. To move or travel forth, on, etc., rapidly, abruptly, or recklessly; to move with a rush or sudden impulse into or out of; to
> hurtle, career. Also fig. 1726 W. Broome in Pope et al. tr. Homer
> Odyssey V. xxiii. 256 He views the strand, And plunging forth with
> transport grasps the land.
>
>
> 1806 T. Jefferson Let. 5 July in Writings (1984) 1165 If the
> executive is to keep all other information to himself, and the House
> to plunge on in the dark, it becomes a government of chance and not of
> design.
>
>
> 1834 L. Ritchie Wanderings by Seine 110 We..plunged into the high
> road leading to Duclair.
>
>
> 1885 Manch. Examiner 22 Jan. 5/2 Under a well-organised fire from
> the works, the Arabs plunged forth upon the square.
>
>
> 1891 C. Graves Field of Tares iv. vi. 241 The Norwich Express,
> plunging out of Liverpool Street Station.
>
>
> a1902 F. Norris Pit (1903) x. 400 She had committed herself now;
> recklessly she plunged on.
>
>
> 1954 Times Lit. Suppl. 12 Nov. 714/4 As the Age of Reason plunged
> towards revolution, Juvenal was carried like a banner in the van of
> the attack.
>
>
> 1990 A. Stevens On Jung ii. 18 The dreamer might see a train,
> carrying him home, plunging in and out of a series of tunnels.
>
>
> 2004 Derby Evening Tel. (Nexis) 16 Mar. 6 If the Germans had
> captured crossings over the Trent, they could have plunged in any
> direction.
>
>
> | Almost all definitions of Plunging seem to imply that it's a word describing vertical descent.
[Merriam Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/plunge) thesaurus includes the following words as related:
>
> dip, immersion, submersion; fall, plump, slip, spill, stumble, tumble; descent, drop; belly flop, header, jackknife, swan dive
>
>
>
None of them indicating a horizontal direction.
Also, [Thesaurus](http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/plunging) synonyms imply a vertical nature.
It may be acceptable to use *plunging* in the sentence but you may not get the intended effect on a reader.
Maybe the following will suit better
>
> She opened the door and **stepped** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
or
>
> She opened the door and **charged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
> |
389,953 | You often *plunge* into the sea or *plunge* you hands into your pockets.
Can the word be used to describe a "horizontal immersion"?
Example sentence:
>
> She opened the door and **plunged** into the blinding sun.
>
>
>
If not, what's a more appropriate word? | 2017/05/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/389953",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/202294/"
] | The OED's first meaning of ***plunge*** involves transitively thrusting, throwing or dropping something (or oneself) into a liquid - from the French ***plonger*** - *to jump into water, to submerge, or sink*
However, sense 4 (intransitive) of the verb covers precisely the circumstance you relate:
>
> 4. intr. To move or travel forth, on, etc., rapidly, abruptly, or recklessly; to move with a rush or sudden impulse into or out of; to
> hurtle, career. Also fig. 1726 W. Broome in Pope et al. tr. Homer
> Odyssey V. xxiii. 256 He views the strand, And plunging forth with
> transport grasps the land.
>
>
> 1806 T. Jefferson Let. 5 July in Writings (1984) 1165 If the
> executive is to keep all other information to himself, and the House
> to plunge on in the dark, it becomes a government of chance and not of
> design.
>
>
> 1834 L. Ritchie Wanderings by Seine 110 We..plunged into the high
> road leading to Duclair.
>
>
> 1885 Manch. Examiner 22 Jan. 5/2 Under a well-organised fire from
> the works, the Arabs plunged forth upon the square.
>
>
> 1891 C. Graves Field of Tares iv. vi. 241 The Norwich Express,
> plunging out of Liverpool Street Station.
>
>
> a1902 F. Norris Pit (1903) x. 400 She had committed herself now;
> recklessly she plunged on.
>
>
> 1954 Times Lit. Suppl. 12 Nov. 714/4 As the Age of Reason plunged
> towards revolution, Juvenal was carried like a banner in the van of
> the attack.
>
>
> 1990 A. Stevens On Jung ii. 18 The dreamer might see a train,
> carrying him home, plunging in and out of a series of tunnels.
>
>
> 2004 Derby Evening Tel. (Nexis) 16 Mar. 6 If the Germans had
> captured crossings over the Trent, they could have plunged in any
> direction.
>
>
> | "Plunged" is a good word to use, but "sunlight" would be much better then "sun".
Otherwise, you could say "emerged" into the sunlight.
One historical example shows both "plunged" and "emerged" would be good choices:
[Reports of Observations of the Total Eclipse of the Sun, August 7, 1869](https://books.google.com/books?id=c00QPyT2IjMC&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=%22plunged%20into%20%22%20sunlight&source=bl&ots=WqTGBpgo99&sig=zznbtkA2vX7fQjSBLuwgE1CF9vY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjT0aK25vvTAhUF6yYKHaqOBnkQ6AEIUTAI#v=onepage&q=%22plunged%20into%20%22%20sunlight&f=false):
>
> ...observed with what frightful rapidity we were plunged into the dark shadow, and the contrary effect as we emerged into sunlight
>
>
> |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | While the it's-not-possible answers are correct for the question you intended to ask lets try another approach:
For colder climates it's technically possible (but economic insanity) to build a refrigerator that contains no cooling element at all. Lets make the Green Fridge (tm):
No ozone-destroying Freon!
No toxic ammonia!
No risk of incomplete combustion of the propane causing CO poisoning!
Uses far less electricity than a normal refrigerator!
You'll be safe against anything less than a direct hit by a nuke!
Dig a big, deep hole. In the hole we put a large, very well insulated, very strong walk-in cooled space. Note that this will be at at least the sub-basement level, ideally it would be accessed by stairs or a ramp going down so as to minimize the air spill when the door is opened. There are two holes in the ceiling of the cooled space.
Above the cooled space, separated by the insulation layer is a large concrete box. One of the holes from the ceiling connects to a U-shaped pipe (so the opening points down) in one corner of the box, the other to a pipe in the opposite corner that connects to the top, again with a U on the end. There is a large bimetallic thermometer on the first pipe that opens or closes a baffle in the pipe. There also must be a drain for the box.
A pipe heading up goes into the third corner of the box, the box is filled with large gravel, a pipe is added in the last corner and it's roofed over and likewise very well insulated. Pipe #3 is insulated and extended to a surface air intake. There is a fan in this pipe (the only powered component in the whole thing!) that turns on when the outside air is colder than the air in the box. The final pipe vents back to the surface, ideally after running a bit through the ground first to dump its cold into the soil.
Now the whole thing is covered over except for the vent pipes and however you plan to get to your storage space. You want some feet of dirt and then a moisture barrier layer and more dirt.
Assuming you sized it big enough and the winters are cold enough this will work--you get a cold space for no more operating costs than running a fan in the winter.
Note that so long as you are dealing with an airburst this should survive anything, although escape might be problematic. You have basically perfect radiation shielding, the only modification you'll need to make to ride out the nuke attack is to add a supply of compressed air to use while the firestorm burns overhead.
(Note: In practice you would put the cold space on the bottom and use a fan to bring up the air, I was going for ultimate green. Also, the thermal mass needed is simply too great to be worth it. However, a related idea is in actual use by some people: Bury your house as indicated, run the air feeds through enough ground and you can climate-control your house with nothing but a fan. While the total heating/cooling needed is a lot greater the outside air will be in the right direction far more often and the natural ground temperature isn't too far below what you want for your house anyway.) | Add an asterisk to "Protect":
>
> Protect\* one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
>
>
>
\* Protect: the explosion will not kill you and the nuke will leave no lasting ill effects. Protection may also apply to others near fridge.
Simply make a normal fridge with small extra box with a piece of string hanging out. "Nuke conversion"-kits also sold separately.
In the event of an imminent nearby nuclear explosion simply enter the fridge, pull the string and the 40 kg of TNT in the box will explode, preventing the nuclear blast from killing you.
Double your money back if the nuke kills you, upon personal application. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | **It's Not Possible**
You have asked for a **Science-Based** answer, and it's just not going to happen. Despite what Indiana Jones says, it's impossible to build a nuke-proof fridge. Even if the fridge itself is basically OK, the concussive force it went under would jar it severely (and rattle anyone inside of it to death) - or the heat of the blast would cook you inside of it.
So to answer your question about what I would make it out of, since I'm selling snake oil anyway I would build it with the CHEAPEST things I could, put a basic lead plating around it all so people thought it was built in a sturdy fashion, then make profit. And shortly after selling a few I'd close up shop and drop the alias I was using.
If I were to try to answer this more to the spirit of your question than how it was asked, to survive the nuke you would want to build the fridge out of lead (obviously). Your trouble would come where you would want your fridge to have enough air to breathe for awhile (you know the nuke is coming, but not exactly when, so you would hide in there for a bit). At that point you can either make holes in your fridge - drastically reducing its efficacy as a food chiller and as a life saving device - or install some kind of oxygen tank and air scrubber. Those however are going to take up a lot of space.
Some other downsides:
The air tank may explode due to the concussive force of the blast. And when your house is on fire, opening a door and releasing a lot of oxygen into the room will result in you being lit on fire. Of course, not opening the door will ALSO result in your death because that fridge will heat up as the house burns. If your house collapses though, it's a bit of a moot point as you'll be trapped in your fridge and won't have to worry about picking one or there other.
.
**Update\***
Because the comments pointed out the OP updated the question with a specific distance a nuclear yield, let's make sure it's still impossible.
According to [NUKEMAP](http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/) a 1.2 Megaton nuke has the following effects at 2km:
**Outside of Fireball Radius (1.04km)**
Well, that's good!
**Inside or Radiation Radius (2.56km)**
Less good. 500rem (5 Sv) of radiation - [that's lethal](https://www.standeyo.com/News_Files/NBC/Roentgen.chart.html)! We need to get that down to about 200rem (2 Sv; the "largest dose that does not cause illness severe enough to require medical care in over 90% of people" per previous link).
The best possible shielding wouldn't be Lead, it would actually be Tungsten. To be safe, we'll use two halving-factors, which would actually reduce radiation to ~125rem (1.25 Sv; a hair over the "Smallest dose causing loss of hair after 2 weeks in at least 10% of people").
Link: [Half-Value Layers](https://www.nde-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Radiography/Physics/HalfValueLayer.htm)
If we used Lead, we would need to line the fridge with: 0.98" (24.9 mm; let's call it 1" or 25.4 mm to be safe).
If we used Tungsten, we would need to line the fridge with: 0.62" (15.8 mm; let's call it 0.7" or 17.8 mm to be safe).
Well, that's possible to accommodate - you're still alive!
**Inside 20PSI (138 kPa) Air Blast Radius (3km)**
Per NUKEMAP, at 20PSI (138 kPa) heavy concrete buildings are severely damaged or demolished. Unless you are living underground or in a very fortunate large concrete building, **per [FEMA](http://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/prevent/rms/155/e155_unit_vi.pdf), you are dead**. You cannot expect the fridge to withstand this blast.
**Inside 5PSI (34.5 kPa) Air Blast Radius (7.4km)**
Per NUKEMAP, at 5PSI (34.5 kPa) residential buildings can be expected to collapse. If you are in your fridge and cannot escape due to the roof having collapsed in front of the door, **you will be trapped and die**.
**Inside the Thermal Radiation Radius (13.6km)**
Per NUKEMAP, within this radius 3rd degree burns can be expected. At this point your house has collapsed on you and spontaneously combusted. If you were lucky enough to survive the pressure (doubtful), **you are now roasting alive in your Tungsten-lined tomb**.
***There is no such thing as being "safe" 2km from any instrument of mass thermonuclear war, least of all in a REFRIGERATOR.*** | Well, I'm going to say, my refrigerator is a SpaceX dragon launch abort system with a baggy of ice inside.
The total volume of the capsule is 25 cubic meters, which is the equivalent of a 2.9m x 2.9m x 3.0m cube, or a refrigerated room, as seen in grocery stores.
According to the spaceX website, the capsule can move a crew (of 3) vertically upwards about 5000 feet (0.9 miles, or 1.5km), which means that it could travel about 7070 feet (2.15km) laterally. This would carry you out from 2km off the blast range to 4.15km. While most buildings would still be completely demolished, you, being in the air, would be perfectly fine with no debris to fall on you. Maybe a bit toasty, but hey, why do you think it has a bag of Ice? |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | GrinningX has quite a good answer but I would like to amend it slightly. The stats quoted appear to refer to a ground burst. Ground bursts are not thought to be targeted against cities because air bursts are more damaging to them. Ground bursts are expected to be used against hardened targets like ICBM silos.
However, if a 1.2MT ground burst did occur in your city it the fridge owner would die for sure. Ground bursts generate enormous quantities of fallout. (Air bursts generate almost no fallout.) Fallout is created when energetic neutrons in the fireball touch heavy matter, converting it into unstable isotopes. Air burst neutrons interact with gasses, and the radioactive isotopes they make from this gas tends to stay aloft.
The fallout from such a ground burst would be lethal for weeks to months - far too long to be hiding inside a refrigerator.
On the other hand, an air burst produces almost no radiation on the ground (neither prompt nor fallout) so the radiation shielding would be largely unneeded. The most important need would be (in this following order of events) 1) protection from the flash (just being inside your house and away from windows is probably good enough), 2) protection from blast (sturdy steel construction and being securely bolted to a sturdy foundation would keep you alive), 3) protection from the heat and fumes from your house burning down, and 4) a mechanism to allow you to exit the fridge even though it has been buried by the debris of your house. Numbers 3 and 4 are quite a bit more difficult and complicated than 1 and 2.
For surviving the fire, maybe some kind of hand-cranked air pump which pulled air in from outside and percolated it through a container of water (to cool the air and remove smoke)? That would help, but would not do anything to reduce carbon monoxide or lethal carbon dioxide levels. Heat would be less of a problem. Fridges are designed to be insulated, so just make sure the gaskets are fire resistant and increase the R value enough to survive.
I'm honestly not sure how to handle egress. It's hard to guess what debris will be on the fridge and how it will be shaped. I don't have any good ideas for this one. | The it's not possible answers are correct if you interpret the requirements strictly in light of the scene from the movie, where the fridge is directly exposed to the nuclear explosion. Having said that, your company could legitimately market a fridge that would be of benefit, within certain limitations.
1. The fridge would require to be installed in a cellar, or ideally in a reinforced shelter dug into your garden. At a time of heightened nuclear tension digging a shelter may be something people are prepared to do, similarly to how Anderson shelters were dug in many gardens in the UK in World War 2. A shelter intended for protection from a nuclear device should ideally have a zigzag tunnel leading to it: the earth will provides a significant amount of protection from direct gamma, neutron and thermal radiation.
2. The fridge should have a large dedicated compartment for fresh water, sufficient for an entire family to drink for at least a couple of days while you trek out of the fallout zone.
3. The fridge should have a (non-refrigerated) compartment for other emergency supplies, particularly enough P-3 particulate masks for the entire family. As above, these will be used during the first couple of days after the explosion while you trek out of the fallout zone, to prevent internal contamination. Other useful items: ear plugs (your eardrums will likely rupture thus providing a route for contamination particles into the lungs / stomach, so you will want to block your ears), disposable razors (contamination will be trapped quite effectively in hair so you will need to ensure everybody gets a close all-over shave, to reduce contamination), basic medical kit including splints and burns dressings.
4. The fridge should have a lead-acid battery backup, for when the power goes down, and beefy EMP protection.
5. The fridge should feature a pull-out strong metal frame so that it can serve the function of a Morrison shelter and protect the users from falling rubble if the building above collapses on the cellar, or the roof of the garden shelter falls in. It should also have a shovel and combination hammer / crowbar / wrench in case you need to dig your way out of the rubble.
It doesn't really work in the same way as the Indiana Jones fridge, but I'd still be pretty happy to have such a fridge in a shelter in my garden if I was worried about possible nuclear attack. Obviously nothing would protect you from a direct hit, but the fridge would considerably enhance a shelter capable of supporting survival in the scenario you outlined as long as sufficient warning was provided to allow you to get into your shelter before the blast. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | It's George Lucas's marketing manager here. We are now working on a new Indiana Jones movie: Indiana Jones and the Blastproof Fridge, where Indiana Jones goes for a quest to find the sacred Superfridge, made by God himself. We're now developing a new blastproof fridge, which will not only be used in our movie, but also put into sale. Here's how it looks like inside:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2Rh4j.png)
Notes:
* the water is accessible from the food storage
* the oxygen is stored in liquid/solid state, at around 30K. This provides a cooling feature on top of all - cold air circulates from the tanks (if it melts from heat inside the fridge) to the fridge, and then back through the air filter.
* The cushioning would be ideally made from polystyren, because it also isolates the inside (but that's for a 10% surcharge)
How it looks on the outside ([source](http://www.heyuguys.com/indiana-jones-5-what-they-need-to-get-right/)):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IGAnH.jpg)
Hope this helped will get us some money! | While the it's-not-possible answers are correct for the question you intended to ask lets try another approach:
For colder climates it's technically possible (but economic insanity) to build a refrigerator that contains no cooling element at all. Lets make the Green Fridge (tm):
No ozone-destroying Freon!
No toxic ammonia!
No risk of incomplete combustion of the propane causing CO poisoning!
Uses far less electricity than a normal refrigerator!
You'll be safe against anything less than a direct hit by a nuke!
Dig a big, deep hole. In the hole we put a large, very well insulated, very strong walk-in cooled space. Note that this will be at at least the sub-basement level, ideally it would be accessed by stairs or a ramp going down so as to minimize the air spill when the door is opened. There are two holes in the ceiling of the cooled space.
Above the cooled space, separated by the insulation layer is a large concrete box. One of the holes from the ceiling connects to a U-shaped pipe (so the opening points down) in one corner of the box, the other to a pipe in the opposite corner that connects to the top, again with a U on the end. There is a large bimetallic thermometer on the first pipe that opens or closes a baffle in the pipe. There also must be a drain for the box.
A pipe heading up goes into the third corner of the box, the box is filled with large gravel, a pipe is added in the last corner and it's roofed over and likewise very well insulated. Pipe #3 is insulated and extended to a surface air intake. There is a fan in this pipe (the only powered component in the whole thing!) that turns on when the outside air is colder than the air in the box. The final pipe vents back to the surface, ideally after running a bit through the ground first to dump its cold into the soil.
Now the whole thing is covered over except for the vent pipes and however you plan to get to your storage space. You want some feet of dirt and then a moisture barrier layer and more dirt.
Assuming you sized it big enough and the winters are cold enough this will work--you get a cold space for no more operating costs than running a fan in the winter.
Note that so long as you are dealing with an airburst this should survive anything, although escape might be problematic. You have basically perfect radiation shielding, the only modification you'll need to make to ride out the nuke attack is to add a supply of compressed air to use while the firestorm burns overhead.
(Note: In practice you would put the cold space on the bottom and use a fan to bring up the air, I was going for ultimate green. Also, the thermal mass needed is simply too great to be worth it. However, a related idea is in actual use by some people: Bury your house as indicated, run the air feeds through enough ground and you can climate-control your house with nothing but a fan. While the total heating/cooling needed is a lot greater the outside air will be in the right direction far more often and the natural ground temperature isn't too far below what you want for your house anyway.) |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | GrinningX has quite a good answer but I would like to amend it slightly. The stats quoted appear to refer to a ground burst. Ground bursts are not thought to be targeted against cities because air bursts are more damaging to them. Ground bursts are expected to be used against hardened targets like ICBM silos.
However, if a 1.2MT ground burst did occur in your city it the fridge owner would die for sure. Ground bursts generate enormous quantities of fallout. (Air bursts generate almost no fallout.) Fallout is created when energetic neutrons in the fireball touch heavy matter, converting it into unstable isotopes. Air burst neutrons interact with gasses, and the radioactive isotopes they make from this gas tends to stay aloft.
The fallout from such a ground burst would be lethal for weeks to months - far too long to be hiding inside a refrigerator.
On the other hand, an air burst produces almost no radiation on the ground (neither prompt nor fallout) so the radiation shielding would be largely unneeded. The most important need would be (in this following order of events) 1) protection from the flash (just being inside your house and away from windows is probably good enough), 2) protection from blast (sturdy steel construction and being securely bolted to a sturdy foundation would keep you alive), 3) protection from the heat and fumes from your house burning down, and 4) a mechanism to allow you to exit the fridge even though it has been buried by the debris of your house. Numbers 3 and 4 are quite a bit more difficult and complicated than 1 and 2.
For surviving the fire, maybe some kind of hand-cranked air pump which pulled air in from outside and percolated it through a container of water (to cool the air and remove smoke)? That would help, but would not do anything to reduce carbon monoxide or lethal carbon dioxide levels. Heat would be less of a problem. Fridges are designed to be insulated, so just make sure the gaskets are fire resistant and increase the R value enough to survive.
I'm honestly not sure how to handle egress. It's hard to guess what debris will be on the fridge and how it will be shaped. I don't have any good ideas for this one. | Your customers will need to:
Put your fridge underground in the cellar;
Reinforce the cellar walls to withstand the shockwave of the blast and the collapse of the house on top.
Add shielding in 2 layers, preferably tungsten, 0.5" each layer, since lead is just messy, on the outer side of the body, and on the inside, just behind the fibreglass interior. Put the insulation in between the two layers of tungsten. The piping and wiring to the outside from the inner compartment should leave through the bottom of the fridge.
Recommend buyers get **TWO** fridges, or one for every member of the family and a spare for actually keeping food in. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | Your customers will need to:
Put your fridge underground in the cellar;
Reinforce the cellar walls to withstand the shockwave of the blast and the collapse of the house on top.
Add shielding in 2 layers, preferably tungsten, 0.5" each layer, since lead is just messy, on the outer side of the body, and on the inside, just behind the fibreglass interior. Put the insulation in between the two layers of tungsten. The piping and wiring to the outside from the inner compartment should leave through the bottom of the fridge.
Recommend buyers get **TWO** fridges, or one for every member of the family and a spare for actually keeping food in. | Add an asterisk to "Protect":
>
> Protect\* one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
>
>
>
\* Protect: the explosion will not kill you and the nuke will leave no lasting ill effects. Protection may also apply to others near fridge.
Simply make a normal fridge with small extra box with a piece of string hanging out. "Nuke conversion"-kits also sold separately.
In the event of an imminent nearby nuclear explosion simply enter the fridge, pull the string and the 40 kg of TNT in the box will explode, preventing the nuclear blast from killing you.
Double your money back if the nuke kills you, upon personal application. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | Well, I'm going to say, my refrigerator is a SpaceX dragon launch abort system with a baggy of ice inside.
The total volume of the capsule is 25 cubic meters, which is the equivalent of a 2.9m x 2.9m x 3.0m cube, or a refrigerated room, as seen in grocery stores.
According to the spaceX website, the capsule can move a crew (of 3) vertically upwards about 5000 feet (0.9 miles, or 1.5km), which means that it could travel about 7070 feet (2.15km) laterally. This would carry you out from 2km off the blast range to 4.15km. While most buildings would still be completely demolished, you, being in the air, would be perfectly fine with no debris to fall on you. Maybe a bit toasty, but hey, why do you think it has a bag of Ice? | GrinningX has quite a good answer but I would like to amend it slightly. The stats quoted appear to refer to a ground burst. Ground bursts are not thought to be targeted against cities because air bursts are more damaging to them. Ground bursts are expected to be used against hardened targets like ICBM silos.
However, if a 1.2MT ground burst did occur in your city it the fridge owner would die for sure. Ground bursts generate enormous quantities of fallout. (Air bursts generate almost no fallout.) Fallout is created when energetic neutrons in the fireball touch heavy matter, converting it into unstable isotopes. Air burst neutrons interact with gasses, and the radioactive isotopes they make from this gas tends to stay aloft.
The fallout from such a ground burst would be lethal for weeks to months - far too long to be hiding inside a refrigerator.
On the other hand, an air burst produces almost no radiation on the ground (neither prompt nor fallout) so the radiation shielding would be largely unneeded. The most important need would be (in this following order of events) 1) protection from the flash (just being inside your house and away from windows is probably good enough), 2) protection from blast (sturdy steel construction and being securely bolted to a sturdy foundation would keep you alive), 3) protection from the heat and fumes from your house burning down, and 4) a mechanism to allow you to exit the fridge even though it has been buried by the debris of your house. Numbers 3 and 4 are quite a bit more difficult and complicated than 1 and 2.
For surviving the fire, maybe some kind of hand-cranked air pump which pulled air in from outside and percolated it through a container of water (to cool the air and remove smoke)? That would help, but would not do anything to reduce carbon monoxide or lethal carbon dioxide levels. Heat would be less of a problem. Fridges are designed to be insulated, so just make sure the gaskets are fire resistant and increase the R value enough to survive.
I'm honestly not sure how to handle egress. It's hard to guess what debris will be on the fridge and how it will be shaped. I don't have any good ideas for this one. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | Well, I'm going to say, my refrigerator is a SpaceX dragon launch abort system with a baggy of ice inside.
The total volume of the capsule is 25 cubic meters, which is the equivalent of a 2.9m x 2.9m x 3.0m cube, or a refrigerated room, as seen in grocery stores.
According to the spaceX website, the capsule can move a crew (of 3) vertically upwards about 5000 feet (0.9 miles, or 1.5km), which means that it could travel about 7070 feet (2.15km) laterally. This would carry you out from 2km off the blast range to 4.15km. While most buildings would still be completely demolished, you, being in the air, would be perfectly fine with no debris to fall on you. Maybe a bit toasty, but hey, why do you think it has a bag of Ice? | While the it's-not-possible answers are correct for the question you intended to ask lets try another approach:
For colder climates it's technically possible (but economic insanity) to build a refrigerator that contains no cooling element at all. Lets make the Green Fridge (tm):
No ozone-destroying Freon!
No toxic ammonia!
No risk of incomplete combustion of the propane causing CO poisoning!
Uses far less electricity than a normal refrigerator!
You'll be safe against anything less than a direct hit by a nuke!
Dig a big, deep hole. In the hole we put a large, very well insulated, very strong walk-in cooled space. Note that this will be at at least the sub-basement level, ideally it would be accessed by stairs or a ramp going down so as to minimize the air spill when the door is opened. There are two holes in the ceiling of the cooled space.
Above the cooled space, separated by the insulation layer is a large concrete box. One of the holes from the ceiling connects to a U-shaped pipe (so the opening points down) in one corner of the box, the other to a pipe in the opposite corner that connects to the top, again with a U on the end. There is a large bimetallic thermometer on the first pipe that opens or closes a baffle in the pipe. There also must be a drain for the box.
A pipe heading up goes into the third corner of the box, the box is filled with large gravel, a pipe is added in the last corner and it's roofed over and likewise very well insulated. Pipe #3 is insulated and extended to a surface air intake. There is a fan in this pipe (the only powered component in the whole thing!) that turns on when the outside air is colder than the air in the box. The final pipe vents back to the surface, ideally after running a bit through the ground first to dump its cold into the soil.
Now the whole thing is covered over except for the vent pipes and however you plan to get to your storage space. You want some feet of dirt and then a moisture barrier layer and more dirt.
Assuming you sized it big enough and the winters are cold enough this will work--you get a cold space for no more operating costs than running a fan in the winter.
Note that so long as you are dealing with an airburst this should survive anything, although escape might be problematic. You have basically perfect radiation shielding, the only modification you'll need to make to ride out the nuke attack is to add a supply of compressed air to use while the firestorm burns overhead.
(Note: In practice you would put the cold space on the bottom and use a fan to bring up the air, I was going for ultimate green. Also, the thermal mass needed is simply too great to be worth it. However, a related idea is in actual use by some people: Bury your house as indicated, run the air feeds through enough ground and you can climate-control your house with nothing but a fan. While the total heating/cooling needed is a lot greater the outside air will be in the right direction far more often and the natural ground temperature isn't too far below what you want for your house anyway.) |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | It's George Lucas's marketing manager here. We are now working on a new Indiana Jones movie: Indiana Jones and the Blastproof Fridge, where Indiana Jones goes for a quest to find the sacred Superfridge, made by God himself. We're now developing a new blastproof fridge, which will not only be used in our movie, but also put into sale. Here's how it looks like inside:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2Rh4j.png)
Notes:
* the water is accessible from the food storage
* the oxygen is stored in liquid/solid state, at around 30K. This provides a cooling feature on top of all - cold air circulates from the tanks (if it melts from heat inside the fridge) to the fridge, and then back through the air filter.
* The cushioning would be ideally made from polystyren, because it also isolates the inside (but that's for a 10% surcharge)
How it looks on the outside ([source](http://www.heyuguys.com/indiana-jones-5-what-they-need-to-get-right/)):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IGAnH.jpg)
Hope this helped will get us some money! | Your customers will need to:
Put your fridge underground in the cellar;
Reinforce the cellar walls to withstand the shockwave of the blast and the collapse of the house on top.
Add shielding in 2 layers, preferably tungsten, 0.5" each layer, since lead is just messy, on the outer side of the body, and on the inside, just behind the fibreglass interior. Put the insulation in between the two layers of tungsten. The piping and wiring to the outside from the inner compartment should leave through the bottom of the fridge.
Recommend buyers get **TWO** fridges, or one for every member of the family and a spare for actually keeping food in. |
55,454 | It's 2016, but for some reason, the Cold War never ended. You've been inspired by your (for some inexplicable reason) favorite movie, Indiana Jones 4, to start a new business: building refrigerators. However, the market is so saturated that in order to distinguish yourself with a nice marketing campaign, you decide to make them **NUKEPROOF!**
The refrigerator should be:
1. Usable as a real refrigerator would be.
2. No bigger than standard double door refrigerator, so no room-sized walk-in refrigerator. Though, you *can* add some additional size for additional armor, for example, in **reasonable** margins, so nothing like 10 meters of iron from one side.
3. Protect one person from up to 1.2 megatonnes of a TNT nuke at a minimum distance of 2 km from the explosion.
How are you going to design it and what materials are you going to use? | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/55454",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/26768/"
] | GrinningX has quite a good answer but I would like to amend it slightly. The stats quoted appear to refer to a ground burst. Ground bursts are not thought to be targeted against cities because air bursts are more damaging to them. Ground bursts are expected to be used against hardened targets like ICBM silos.
However, if a 1.2MT ground burst did occur in your city it the fridge owner would die for sure. Ground bursts generate enormous quantities of fallout. (Air bursts generate almost no fallout.) Fallout is created when energetic neutrons in the fireball touch heavy matter, converting it into unstable isotopes. Air burst neutrons interact with gasses, and the radioactive isotopes they make from this gas tends to stay aloft.
The fallout from such a ground burst would be lethal for weeks to months - far too long to be hiding inside a refrigerator.
On the other hand, an air burst produces almost no radiation on the ground (neither prompt nor fallout) so the radiation shielding would be largely unneeded. The most important need would be (in this following order of events) 1) protection from the flash (just being inside your house and away from windows is probably good enough), 2) protection from blast (sturdy steel construction and being securely bolted to a sturdy foundation would keep you alive), 3) protection from the heat and fumes from your house burning down, and 4) a mechanism to allow you to exit the fridge even though it has been buried by the debris of your house. Numbers 3 and 4 are quite a bit more difficult and complicated than 1 and 2.
For surviving the fire, maybe some kind of hand-cranked air pump which pulled air in from outside and percolated it through a container of water (to cool the air and remove smoke)? That would help, but would not do anything to reduce carbon monoxide or lethal carbon dioxide levels. Heat would be less of a problem. Fridges are designed to be insulated, so just make sure the gaskets are fire resistant and increase the R value enough to survive.
I'm honestly not sure how to handle egress. It's hard to guess what debris will be on the fridge and how it will be shaped. I don't have any good ideas for this one. | While the it's-not-possible answers are correct for the question you intended to ask lets try another approach:
For colder climates it's technically possible (but economic insanity) to build a refrigerator that contains no cooling element at all. Lets make the Green Fridge (tm):
No ozone-destroying Freon!
No toxic ammonia!
No risk of incomplete combustion of the propane causing CO poisoning!
Uses far less electricity than a normal refrigerator!
You'll be safe against anything less than a direct hit by a nuke!
Dig a big, deep hole. In the hole we put a large, very well insulated, very strong walk-in cooled space. Note that this will be at at least the sub-basement level, ideally it would be accessed by stairs or a ramp going down so as to minimize the air spill when the door is opened. There are two holes in the ceiling of the cooled space.
Above the cooled space, separated by the insulation layer is a large concrete box. One of the holes from the ceiling connects to a U-shaped pipe (so the opening points down) in one corner of the box, the other to a pipe in the opposite corner that connects to the top, again with a U on the end. There is a large bimetallic thermometer on the first pipe that opens or closes a baffle in the pipe. There also must be a drain for the box.
A pipe heading up goes into the third corner of the box, the box is filled with large gravel, a pipe is added in the last corner and it's roofed over and likewise very well insulated. Pipe #3 is insulated and extended to a surface air intake. There is a fan in this pipe (the only powered component in the whole thing!) that turns on when the outside air is colder than the air in the box. The final pipe vents back to the surface, ideally after running a bit through the ground first to dump its cold into the soil.
Now the whole thing is covered over except for the vent pipes and however you plan to get to your storage space. You want some feet of dirt and then a moisture barrier layer and more dirt.
Assuming you sized it big enough and the winters are cold enough this will work--you get a cold space for no more operating costs than running a fan in the winter.
Note that so long as you are dealing with an airburst this should survive anything, although escape might be problematic. You have basically perfect radiation shielding, the only modification you'll need to make to ride out the nuke attack is to add a supply of compressed air to use while the firestorm burns overhead.
(Note: In practice you would put the cold space on the bottom and use a fan to bring up the air, I was going for ultimate green. Also, the thermal mass needed is simply too great to be worth it. However, a related idea is in actual use by some people: Bury your house as indicated, run the air feeds through enough ground and you can climate-control your house with nothing but a fan. While the total heating/cooling needed is a lot greater the outside air will be in the right direction far more often and the natural ground temperature isn't too far below what you want for your house anyway.) |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | **No, not typical**, why are you solving their problems for free? (4 hours)
1 hour is typical for a programming test. In the past our programming test was 4 questions. First 3 questions took 1/2 hour, last one 1/2 hour. We also gave the test to existing hires in house to make sure we were in the expected timeframe and the test was fair and adjusted accordlingly.
The first few question(s) were "Fizz Buzz" type to weed out people who can't program. They got progressively harder. The last question was a problem solving exercise. Generally we tried to limit the amount of code written to around a few hundred lines (total) and not require any clever tricks. We also scored people on error handling, style, syntax, organization, etc. The questions were not related to our business but rather the skills and technology that the current platform was written in.
Typically, great candidates finished in less time than was allotted. Sometimes people requested extra time which we allowed because of the stress involved in taking a quiz, but we capped everyone at a certain limit. The quiz was in the current development environment and people had access to the internet for reference information. We also went over the expectations of the quiz to every candidate.
At one time we did discuss incorporating our code base (real world) into the quiz but we eventually discarded that due to concerns that code copied off/stolen/etc (our boss was a bit paranoid). Eventually we just went with a separate `quiz.sln` in an isolated development machine.
Finally, we found it was hard to come up with a test that was fair, but neither too hard nor too easy. We always asked our candidates about the quiz after they took it and garnered their feedback to refine it for future candidates. | I find coding tests in interview are a load of tosh anyway. No-one codes anything but the simplest routine under pressure without the usual environment and tools, so the results you get are dubious at best.
What I have found to be really good tests of a programmer's ability is to give him some project code and ask him to review it, this works really well if the code has several obvious bugs, several obvious code issues, and a few questionable practices. A good coder will tell you all of them, and will engage with you in discussion of why some code isn't 'wrong' but could be done better to ease maintenance or so. A poor programmer will find a bug and stop.
Any job that expects you to do a test that takes more than half an hour just hasn't spent even that long working out a good, targetted test that provides them with more than a vague idea of your skills. (most companies find it very hard to spend any time working on pre-interview setup).
If I was given a test like you'd got, I'd write the answer in pseudo-code. That should be enough to demonstrate my understanding of coding and design, without going through the entire compile, build and test phases you would for a normal work project. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | Let me take the company's side for a moment, since the other answers haven't so far. It would be nearly impossible to build a usable code base out of a conglomeration of 4-hour coding test submissions from people whose qualifications are completely unknown. Creating a detailed enough specification, vetting the responses, and integrating it with the rest of your code would take longer than 4 hours. Not to mention most useful enterprise-level software projects require thousands of man hours. The thought of building a business on splitting that out into 4-hour increments with weeks of turnaround time each is frankly ridiculous.
Giving a real life problem of the business is one of the best ways to determine if someone will be good at, shockingly, solving real life problems of the business. I do this frequently in interviews (although I ask for general design principles and not 4 hours worth of code), and every single time it has been a problem I have already solved. If I hadn't already solved it, the test would lose almost all probative value.
Whether a 4-hour test is worth it to you is a personal decision. I was always taught to treat looking for full-time work as a full time job. When you're unemployed or underemployed and spending 8 hours a day looking for work, a 4-hour coding test is nothing. I've spent far longer than that on tasks like brushing up on rusty languages, writing portfolio programs, and customizing resumes for specific positions.
On the other hand, some of the best workers are already gainfully employed, and only casually looking for better opportunities. People in that situation are unlikely to go through the rigamarole of a 4-hour test, unless the opportunity is stellar. However, that's the company's problem, not yours.
As far as discerning what it means about the company's attitude toward their employees, I don't think you can really say anything either way, other than they are probably tired of dealing with unqualified applicants, to a degree that they're willing to throw out some of the good with the bad. | **No, not typical**, why are you solving their problems for free? (4 hours)
1 hour is typical for a programming test. In the past our programming test was 4 questions. First 3 questions took 1/2 hour, last one 1/2 hour. We also gave the test to existing hires in house to make sure we were in the expected timeframe and the test was fair and adjusted accordlingly.
The first few question(s) were "Fizz Buzz" type to weed out people who can't program. They got progressively harder. The last question was a problem solving exercise. Generally we tried to limit the amount of code written to around a few hundred lines (total) and not require any clever tricks. We also scored people on error handling, style, syntax, organization, etc. The questions were not related to our business but rather the skills and technology that the current platform was written in.
Typically, great candidates finished in less time than was allotted. Sometimes people requested extra time which we allowed because of the stress involved in taking a quiz, but we capped everyone at a certain limit. The quiz was in the current development environment and people had access to the internet for reference information. We also went over the expectations of the quiz to every candidate.
At one time we did discuss incorporating our code base (real world) into the quiz but we eventually discarded that due to concerns that code copied off/stolen/etc (our boss was a bit paranoid). Eventually we just went with a separate `quiz.sln` in an isolated development machine.
Finally, we found it was hard to come up with a test that was fair, but neither too hard nor too easy. We always asked our candidates about the quiz after they took it and garnered their feedback to refine it for future candidates. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | **No, not typical**, why are you solving their problems for free? (4 hours)
1 hour is typical for a programming test. In the past our programming test was 4 questions. First 3 questions took 1/2 hour, last one 1/2 hour. We also gave the test to existing hires in house to make sure we were in the expected timeframe and the test was fair and adjusted accordlingly.
The first few question(s) were "Fizz Buzz" type to weed out people who can't program. They got progressively harder. The last question was a problem solving exercise. Generally we tried to limit the amount of code written to around a few hundred lines (total) and not require any clever tricks. We also scored people on error handling, style, syntax, organization, etc. The questions were not related to our business but rather the skills and technology that the current platform was written in.
Typically, great candidates finished in less time than was allotted. Sometimes people requested extra time which we allowed because of the stress involved in taking a quiz, but we capped everyone at a certain limit. The quiz was in the current development environment and people had access to the internet for reference information. We also went over the expectations of the quiz to every candidate.
At one time we did discuss incorporating our code base (real world) into the quiz but we eventually discarded that due to concerns that code copied off/stolen/etc (our boss was a bit paranoid). Eventually we just went with a separate `quiz.sln` in an isolated development machine.
Finally, we found it was hard to come up with a test that was fair, but neither too hard nor too easy. We always asked our candidates about the quiz after they took it and garnered their feedback to refine it for future candidates. | I took a 6 hour coding test at one point. When I took this test I had fairly high confidence I would be hired - while it came true, I wasn't all that satisfied with the follow-on.
Obviously having lots of employers each asking for 4 hours is excessive. What the person was looking for in the test I took was my coding style - I was hired because mine was 'closest' to his. In this context, look at the problem from this perspective: First, is it an interesting problem that solving is worthwhile to you in any case? After all, you could learn something valuable.
Second, if you can 'pass' the test does it mean you're hired? If this isn't fairly obvious then you have to decide whether there are other reasons to do it anyway.
Third, they might estimate that it takes '4 hours', but you might find out differently. Do they really know how long this should take? Most likely the answer is no. Therefore, they are going to keep testing people on 4 hour deadlines until they realize it won't fit in four hours. In that case you're wasting your time. The best approach then is to get aggressive with the hiring manager, and figure out whether you should stop at four hours and give them what you have, or continue until it's done and tell them how long it took. In short, there may be a character test wrapped up in this, and simply trying to accept it on their terms may reveal inexperience. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | **No, not typical**, why are you solving their problems for free? (4 hours)
1 hour is typical for a programming test. In the past our programming test was 4 questions. First 3 questions took 1/2 hour, last one 1/2 hour. We also gave the test to existing hires in house to make sure we were in the expected timeframe and the test was fair and adjusted accordlingly.
The first few question(s) were "Fizz Buzz" type to weed out people who can't program. They got progressively harder. The last question was a problem solving exercise. Generally we tried to limit the amount of code written to around a few hundred lines (total) and not require any clever tricks. We also scored people on error handling, style, syntax, organization, etc. The questions were not related to our business but rather the skills and technology that the current platform was written in.
Typically, great candidates finished in less time than was allotted. Sometimes people requested extra time which we allowed because of the stress involved in taking a quiz, but we capped everyone at a certain limit. The quiz was in the current development environment and people had access to the internet for reference information. We also went over the expectations of the quiz to every candidate.
At one time we did discuss incorporating our code base (real world) into the quiz but we eventually discarded that due to concerns that code copied off/stolen/etc (our boss was a bit paranoid). Eventually we just went with a separate `quiz.sln` in an isolated development machine.
Finally, we found it was hard to come up with a test that was fair, but neither too hard nor too easy. We always asked our candidates about the quiz after they took it and garnered their feedback to refine it for future candidates. | You may not have 4 hours, but somebody more interested in their company certainly will. I was essentially hired based on a similar task that a company asked me to do beforehand on the task alone. Apparently, writing clean and understandable code, thorough test cases and understandable and coherent design documentation is an abnormality. Actually seeing someone do it blew people away. Anyways, everyone I spoke with at the interview commended me on what I did and I felt like I had to impress nobody in the interview because they had already made up their mind. It was simply a matter of me not giving them a reason to say no by doing something stupid.
So while I agree 4 hours is a fairly large time investment, it also means the task is of sufficient size that you have an opportunity to really show what you are capable of. Your work very well may speak volumes more than you ever could in an actual interview situation.
As a side note: I have tried a similar thing lately but using a much smaller problem and I haven't been happy with the results. Small problems are to trivial to demonstrate enough of the person's knowledge. Plus, trivial problems tend to require the person to recognize some trick/detail necessary to solve the problem. Thus, there is some balance between taking up too much of a person's time versus not gaining any real benefits because the task is to trivial. I would think a 4 hour task is probably the right amount of time to be complex enough for candidates to demonstrate their skills and not be so long that nobody would bother. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | Let me take the company's side for a moment, since the other answers haven't so far. It would be nearly impossible to build a usable code base out of a conglomeration of 4-hour coding test submissions from people whose qualifications are completely unknown. Creating a detailed enough specification, vetting the responses, and integrating it with the rest of your code would take longer than 4 hours. Not to mention most useful enterprise-level software projects require thousands of man hours. The thought of building a business on splitting that out into 4-hour increments with weeks of turnaround time each is frankly ridiculous.
Giving a real life problem of the business is one of the best ways to determine if someone will be good at, shockingly, solving real life problems of the business. I do this frequently in interviews (although I ask for general design principles and not 4 hours worth of code), and every single time it has been a problem I have already solved. If I hadn't already solved it, the test would lose almost all probative value.
Whether a 4-hour test is worth it to you is a personal decision. I was always taught to treat looking for full-time work as a full time job. When you're unemployed or underemployed and spending 8 hours a day looking for work, a 4-hour coding test is nothing. I've spent far longer than that on tasks like brushing up on rusty languages, writing portfolio programs, and customizing resumes for specific positions.
On the other hand, some of the best workers are already gainfully employed, and only casually looking for better opportunities. People in that situation are unlikely to go through the rigamarole of a 4-hour test, unless the opportunity is stellar. However, that's the company's problem, not yours.
As far as discerning what it means about the company's attitude toward their employees, I don't think you can really say anything either way, other than they are probably tired of dealing with unqualified applicants, to a degree that they're willing to throw out some of the good with the bad. | I find coding tests in interview are a load of tosh anyway. No-one codes anything but the simplest routine under pressure without the usual environment and tools, so the results you get are dubious at best.
What I have found to be really good tests of a programmer's ability is to give him some project code and ask him to review it, this works really well if the code has several obvious bugs, several obvious code issues, and a few questionable practices. A good coder will tell you all of them, and will engage with you in discussion of why some code isn't 'wrong' but could be done better to ease maintenance or so. A poor programmer will find a bug and stop.
Any job that expects you to do a test that takes more than half an hour just hasn't spent even that long working out a good, targetted test that provides them with more than a vague idea of your skills. (most companies find it very hard to spend any time working on pre-interview setup).
If I was given a test like you'd got, I'd write the answer in pseudo-code. That should be enough to demonstrate my understanding of coding and design, without going through the entire compile, build and test phases you would for a normal work project. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | I find coding tests in interview are a load of tosh anyway. No-one codes anything but the simplest routine under pressure without the usual environment and tools, so the results you get are dubious at best.
What I have found to be really good tests of a programmer's ability is to give him some project code and ask him to review it, this works really well if the code has several obvious bugs, several obvious code issues, and a few questionable practices. A good coder will tell you all of them, and will engage with you in discussion of why some code isn't 'wrong' but could be done better to ease maintenance or so. A poor programmer will find a bug and stop.
Any job that expects you to do a test that takes more than half an hour just hasn't spent even that long working out a good, targetted test that provides them with more than a vague idea of your skills. (most companies find it very hard to spend any time working on pre-interview setup).
If I was given a test like you'd got, I'd write the answer in pseudo-code. That should be enough to demonstrate my understanding of coding and design, without going through the entire compile, build and test phases you would for a normal work project. | I took a 6 hour coding test at one point. When I took this test I had fairly high confidence I would be hired - while it came true, I wasn't all that satisfied with the follow-on.
Obviously having lots of employers each asking for 4 hours is excessive. What the person was looking for in the test I took was my coding style - I was hired because mine was 'closest' to his. In this context, look at the problem from this perspective: First, is it an interesting problem that solving is worthwhile to you in any case? After all, you could learn something valuable.
Second, if you can 'pass' the test does it mean you're hired? If this isn't fairly obvious then you have to decide whether there are other reasons to do it anyway.
Third, they might estimate that it takes '4 hours', but you might find out differently. Do they really know how long this should take? Most likely the answer is no. Therefore, they are going to keep testing people on 4 hour deadlines until they realize it won't fit in four hours. In that case you're wasting your time. The best approach then is to get aggressive with the hiring manager, and figure out whether you should stop at four hours and give them what you have, or continue until it's done and tell them how long it took. In short, there may be a character test wrapped up in this, and simply trying to accept it on their terms may reveal inexperience. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | I find coding tests in interview are a load of tosh anyway. No-one codes anything but the simplest routine under pressure without the usual environment and tools, so the results you get are dubious at best.
What I have found to be really good tests of a programmer's ability is to give him some project code and ask him to review it, this works really well if the code has several obvious bugs, several obvious code issues, and a few questionable practices. A good coder will tell you all of them, and will engage with you in discussion of why some code isn't 'wrong' but could be done better to ease maintenance or so. A poor programmer will find a bug and stop.
Any job that expects you to do a test that takes more than half an hour just hasn't spent even that long working out a good, targetted test that provides them with more than a vague idea of your skills. (most companies find it very hard to spend any time working on pre-interview setup).
If I was given a test like you'd got, I'd write the answer in pseudo-code. That should be enough to demonstrate my understanding of coding and design, without going through the entire compile, build and test phases you would for a normal work project. | You may not have 4 hours, but somebody more interested in their company certainly will. I was essentially hired based on a similar task that a company asked me to do beforehand on the task alone. Apparently, writing clean and understandable code, thorough test cases and understandable and coherent design documentation is an abnormality. Actually seeing someone do it blew people away. Anyways, everyone I spoke with at the interview commended me on what I did and I felt like I had to impress nobody in the interview because they had already made up their mind. It was simply a matter of me not giving them a reason to say no by doing something stupid.
So while I agree 4 hours is a fairly large time investment, it also means the task is of sufficient size that you have an opportunity to really show what you are capable of. Your work very well may speak volumes more than you ever could in an actual interview situation.
As a side note: I have tried a similar thing lately but using a much smaller problem and I haven't been happy with the results. Small problems are to trivial to demonstrate enough of the person's knowledge. Plus, trivial problems tend to require the person to recognize some trick/detail necessary to solve the problem. Thus, there is some balance between taking up too much of a person's time versus not gaining any real benefits because the task is to trivial. I would think a 4 hour task is probably the right amount of time to be complex enough for candidates to demonstrate their skills and not be so long that nobody would bother. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | Let me take the company's side for a moment, since the other answers haven't so far. It would be nearly impossible to build a usable code base out of a conglomeration of 4-hour coding test submissions from people whose qualifications are completely unknown. Creating a detailed enough specification, vetting the responses, and integrating it with the rest of your code would take longer than 4 hours. Not to mention most useful enterprise-level software projects require thousands of man hours. The thought of building a business on splitting that out into 4-hour increments with weeks of turnaround time each is frankly ridiculous.
Giving a real life problem of the business is one of the best ways to determine if someone will be good at, shockingly, solving real life problems of the business. I do this frequently in interviews (although I ask for general design principles and not 4 hours worth of code), and every single time it has been a problem I have already solved. If I hadn't already solved it, the test would lose almost all probative value.
Whether a 4-hour test is worth it to you is a personal decision. I was always taught to treat looking for full-time work as a full time job. When you're unemployed or underemployed and spending 8 hours a day looking for work, a 4-hour coding test is nothing. I've spent far longer than that on tasks like brushing up on rusty languages, writing portfolio programs, and customizing resumes for specific positions.
On the other hand, some of the best workers are already gainfully employed, and only casually looking for better opportunities. People in that situation are unlikely to go through the rigamarole of a 4-hour test, unless the opportunity is stellar. However, that's the company's problem, not yours.
As far as discerning what it means about the company's attitude toward their employees, I don't think you can really say anything either way, other than they are probably tired of dealing with unqualified applicants, to a degree that they're willing to throw out some of the good with the bad. | I took a 6 hour coding test at one point. When I took this test I had fairly high confidence I would be hired - while it came true, I wasn't all that satisfied with the follow-on.
Obviously having lots of employers each asking for 4 hours is excessive. What the person was looking for in the test I took was my coding style - I was hired because mine was 'closest' to his. In this context, look at the problem from this perspective: First, is it an interesting problem that solving is worthwhile to you in any case? After all, you could learn something valuable.
Second, if you can 'pass' the test does it mean you're hired? If this isn't fairly obvious then you have to decide whether there are other reasons to do it anyway.
Third, they might estimate that it takes '4 hours', but you might find out differently. Do they really know how long this should take? Most likely the answer is no. Therefore, they are going to keep testing people on 4 hour deadlines until they realize it won't fit in four hours. In that case you're wasting your time. The best approach then is to get aggressive with the hiring manager, and figure out whether you should stop at four hours and give them what you have, or continue until it's done and tell them how long it took. In short, there may be a character test wrapped up in this, and simply trying to accept it on their terms may reveal inexperience. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | Let me take the company's side for a moment, since the other answers haven't so far. It would be nearly impossible to build a usable code base out of a conglomeration of 4-hour coding test submissions from people whose qualifications are completely unknown. Creating a detailed enough specification, vetting the responses, and integrating it with the rest of your code would take longer than 4 hours. Not to mention most useful enterprise-level software projects require thousands of man hours. The thought of building a business on splitting that out into 4-hour increments with weeks of turnaround time each is frankly ridiculous.
Giving a real life problem of the business is one of the best ways to determine if someone will be good at, shockingly, solving real life problems of the business. I do this frequently in interviews (although I ask for general design principles and not 4 hours worth of code), and every single time it has been a problem I have already solved. If I hadn't already solved it, the test would lose almost all probative value.
Whether a 4-hour test is worth it to you is a personal decision. I was always taught to treat looking for full-time work as a full time job. When you're unemployed or underemployed and spending 8 hours a day looking for work, a 4-hour coding test is nothing. I've spent far longer than that on tasks like brushing up on rusty languages, writing portfolio programs, and customizing resumes for specific positions.
On the other hand, some of the best workers are already gainfully employed, and only casually looking for better opportunities. People in that situation are unlikely to go through the rigamarole of a 4-hour test, unless the opportunity is stellar. However, that's the company's problem, not yours.
As far as discerning what it means about the company's attitude toward their employees, I don't think you can really say anything either way, other than they are probably tired of dealing with unqualified applicants, to a degree that they're willing to throw out some of the good with the bad. | You may not have 4 hours, but somebody more interested in their company certainly will. I was essentially hired based on a similar task that a company asked me to do beforehand on the task alone. Apparently, writing clean and understandable code, thorough test cases and understandable and coherent design documentation is an abnormality. Actually seeing someone do it blew people away. Anyways, everyone I spoke with at the interview commended me on what I did and I felt like I had to impress nobody in the interview because they had already made up their mind. It was simply a matter of me not giving them a reason to say no by doing something stupid.
So while I agree 4 hours is a fairly large time investment, it also means the task is of sufficient size that you have an opportunity to really show what you are capable of. Your work very well may speak volumes more than you ever could in an actual interview situation.
As a side note: I have tried a similar thing lately but using a much smaller problem and I haven't been happy with the results. Small problems are to trivial to demonstrate enough of the person's knowledge. Plus, trivial problems tend to require the person to recognize some trick/detail necessary to solve the problem. Thus, there is some balance between taking up too much of a person's time versus not gaining any real benefits because the task is to trivial. I would think a 4 hour task is probably the right amount of time to be complex enough for candidates to demonstrate their skills and not be so long that nobody would bother. |
206,671 | **EDIT**
After a good amount of thinking and self-reflection on the topic, I realised that most of the issues I raised in this question was coming only from a personal, rather than a professional perspective. Hence the moderators put this question on hold because of the highly personal, subjective nature of the problem I tried to talk about. I was thinking about rephrasing the question but I could not really find a possible way to manifest the question in more objective way so it can be the subject of a discussion where answers can be back up with some sort of evidence or references.
For the sake of those who are still interested, I am trying to give a summary of the discussion emerged from this question:
* a 4 hours pre-interview, offsite programming test is not usual but
* many people pointed it out that for some companies you would interview for much-much longer than that all together
* it is our personal decision if we take a test or not, and we can evaluate this based on our circumstances and the perceived benefits of getting hired for the company
* all companies are different, as people are, and it can be perfectly reasonable for a company to employ a longer pre-interview offsite test, if that is what fits their needs or circumstances
I wanted my original question to be about how *reasonable* to expect 4 hours from me, and how *ethical* to give out a problem so the solution (not the code, but the design) can be possibly used for the company. As I can now see both of these questions can only (at best) be explored in a forum discussion, rather than using a question-answer type community tool like stackexchange.
However, I found all your answers valuable and thanks for sharing.
**ORIGINAL POST**
I am interviewing for several positions, and most of them include a pre-screening phase where I have to submit a coding test before the telephone interview or the onsite interview would take place. I have pretty much got used to this idea, and find it quite reasonable that companies expect me to do this so they can check what type of work I can produce on my own.
Generally, my experience is that these type of coding exercises are mostly small programming tasks. Do some logic, maybe implement a small algorithm, open a file and read/write data, stuff like that. Even the most simple task can be implemented with nice separation of logic, testable components, etc, to see how the candidate is coding, generally how well he is prepared for the type of job a company want to fill in.
Recently I came across a company who sent me a coding test with a whole page long description of their exercise, asking me to solve a real life problem of their business (I don't want to say specifics to protect the company, but the test was pretty much about what they do). They described a pretty complex system to implement, included real data, and in the end they concluded that the coding test should not take more than **4 hours**.
Is it reasonable from a company to expect me to spend 4 hours working on their dummy assignment in my free time, even before they would say hi to me? (the recruiter sent me the coding test)
Don't get me wrong, I am motivated to find a new job and new challenges, but most companies expect me to spend maximum 1-2 hours on a task like that, and such tasks has always been far less complicated.
What I came up as a conclusion with this company is that either:
1) My motivation is not good and probably they are looking for someone else
2) They do not respect their future employees to expect such a long coding tests to do even without saying hi to them
3) They just want to give out one of the problems they work on and see if there is an enthusiastic young fella who would solve it for them for free (again, don't get me wrong I am not a conspiracy theorist but I have heard such stories ...)
How much do you think is reasonable for a company to expect candidates spend time on their dummy coding tests without talking to them? What is your experience generally? | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/206671",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/30439/"
] | You may not have 4 hours, but somebody more interested in their company certainly will. I was essentially hired based on a similar task that a company asked me to do beforehand on the task alone. Apparently, writing clean and understandable code, thorough test cases and understandable and coherent design documentation is an abnormality. Actually seeing someone do it blew people away. Anyways, everyone I spoke with at the interview commended me on what I did and I felt like I had to impress nobody in the interview because they had already made up their mind. It was simply a matter of me not giving them a reason to say no by doing something stupid.
So while I agree 4 hours is a fairly large time investment, it also means the task is of sufficient size that you have an opportunity to really show what you are capable of. Your work very well may speak volumes more than you ever could in an actual interview situation.
As a side note: I have tried a similar thing lately but using a much smaller problem and I haven't been happy with the results. Small problems are to trivial to demonstrate enough of the person's knowledge. Plus, trivial problems tend to require the person to recognize some trick/detail necessary to solve the problem. Thus, there is some balance between taking up too much of a person's time versus not gaining any real benefits because the task is to trivial. I would think a 4 hour task is probably the right amount of time to be complex enough for candidates to demonstrate their skills and not be so long that nobody would bother. | I took a 6 hour coding test at one point. When I took this test I had fairly high confidence I would be hired - while it came true, I wasn't all that satisfied with the follow-on.
Obviously having lots of employers each asking for 4 hours is excessive. What the person was looking for in the test I took was my coding style - I was hired because mine was 'closest' to his. In this context, look at the problem from this perspective: First, is it an interesting problem that solving is worthwhile to you in any case? After all, you could learn something valuable.
Second, if you can 'pass' the test does it mean you're hired? If this isn't fairly obvious then you have to decide whether there are other reasons to do it anyway.
Third, they might estimate that it takes '4 hours', but you might find out differently. Do they really know how long this should take? Most likely the answer is no. Therefore, they are going to keep testing people on 4 hour deadlines until they realize it won't fit in four hours. In that case you're wasting your time. The best approach then is to get aggressive with the hiring manager, and figure out whether you should stop at four hours and give them what you have, or continue until it's done and tell them how long it took. In short, there may be a character test wrapped up in this, and simply trying to accept it on their terms may reveal inexperience. |
10,739 | I'm currently working on a novel, in which one of the POV characters is a slave. He was born to a slave (so he was born a slave) of a rich merchant family and was treated well most of his life. One day he travels with his master to a foreign country where slavery had been abolished. The interaction with the foreign "free" people makes him doubt his position.
Might be relevant that he is of a different race than his masters, and the population of the foreign country he travels to belongs to his race.
Initially I want him to not see the injustice in his state and to love his master (they have a close relationship since they grew up together), yet I (born into a *mostly* slave-free world) have no idea how to portray him. Almost anything I try to write about him feels contrived.
How could I better identify with him?
or
Any reference to a novel (historical fiction preferred, could be any period in history) with a slave POV character (third-person preferred) will do. | 2014/04/16 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/10739",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/8048/"
] | If you're looking for first-hand accounts, I'd recommend [Ten Years a Slave](http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1499102534/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1499102534&linkCode=as2&tag=nonshewro0a-21). It's an autobiographical account of a free black man who was forced into slavery, and it's pretty shocking. It was also made into a (wonderful/horrific) film last year, which I'd recommend looking out for.
For a short-read, there's [A Letter to my Old Master](http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html), a letter - believed to be real - from a freed slave to his old master, who asked him to return to work.
It's not quite a first-hand account, but I'd also recommend looking up the YouTube series Ask a Slave; it's based on the real-life, modern experiences of an actress working in a historical house, where she portrayed a slave and had to answer questions from visitors about her 'daily life'. What's quite interesting is seeing the inherent beliefs and misunderstandings people still have today about slavery and race.
Also, I don't have any books to recommend but it might be worth looking into Stockholme Syndrome and domestic abuse as well as slavery, to help with the angle of your character loving the slave owner. It might help your character feel less contrived if, instead of being naive, he's been manipulated. I think you can believe anything is 'your fault' if someone tells you so long enough.
For some more generic thoughts about your story, a person who has been raised in slavery from birth would most likely be indoctrined in the religion and custom of their slavers, which could potentially help mould the thoughts of your character. I'm not certain if your story takes place in this world? It might help your story to create some specific, rather racist religion if it doesn't, but even if it does some people have interpreted the Curse of Ham in the Bible as a condemnation of dark skin - as if it's something you're cursed with - and the Book of Mormon has mentions of God 'setting a mark upon' sinners, which has been interpreted as meaning giving them dark skin.
Now obviously that's hogswash, but if you lived in a culture of slavery, you would want to find reasons to justify your actions and ways of seeing your slaves as something lesser than you, and you could easily find meanings in religious passages to support your needs.
In Ten Years a Slave, the slave owners regularly gather the slaves to listen to Christian sermons and speeches, and if you were brought up having people read from important-sounding books every day, and explaining that the passages mean you're indebted to them, you might well believe it yourself.
However, I think the older you got, the more difficult it would be to believe. As What said, you would most likely be aware of the injustice. I think it would be entirely human to ask, 'Why me? What's the difference between me and my master?' You would compare yourself to them, especially if you were brought up together, and I'm sure more than once you'd see injustice directly, even if it was small - say he hit you with a stick or stole sweets from the pantry. When *his* skin didn't 'darken' and he wasn't beaten, you would have to question why.
It gets harder if there are more slaves, as there are likely to be, as you would be exposed to more points of view which would likely be different, and it would be very easy to be jaded and bitter from very early on. Even 'kind' masters didn't treat their slaves *well*; a slave is a slave.
I don't know how grim a story yours is, but in American slavery, we have accounts of children being taken away from parents and sold, and young women being raped; it would be pretty easy to see the injustice there.
Still, as Craig pointed out, some slaves in America stayed with their masters because it was the only life they'd known - a home and daily meals (and not being killed for running away) would seem the sensible option to many people. That doesn't mean they were *happy*. It's not really comparable but just as an example of human psychology, in 2011 Gallup reported 71% of American workers hate their jobs - I think it's fair to say a lot of people, no matter the situation, will take the devil they know.
I think there's a very interesting and complex psychology there to explore. Good luck! | Although not a slave in the sense you're describing, I would recommend reading Nelson Mandela's first volume of his auto biography, Long Walk To Freedom.
What is quite interesting in this book is that he starts off not really seeing the injustice of his situation, or that of his people, primarily because of where he is raised, how he is raised, the education he receives, and the benefits that he gets from his situation (for example, access to education that is done to make him and other black South Africans be more like a British concept of a 'gentleman'). While he was among a small minority that could get education, the general populace were left to live as they always had, and given the "freedom" to do so.
There is one particular moment I recall in the book where Mandela is undergoing his right of passage to becoming a man in Xhosa culture, and a local chief who was the guest speaker (I forget who, apologies) gives a speech about how the Xhosa people are not free, and Mandela gets angry thinking this man is being so ungrateful for what they have.
True, Mandela was not directly a slave, or owned by someone, but the same principles apply: you grow up in a world where you don't know any better, and you're often purposefully left uneducated so you don't ask awkward questions, but given enough to improve your lot that you are grateful.
Even during slavery in America, slaves often stayed with their masters not just because of the threat of violence or intimidation, but were content with their lot, often because many didn't know anything different, were uneducated, and only knew how to perform manual labour. They had somewhere to live, food, and some were given autonomy to practise various manual skills and even hire out their skills for a wage. Their friends and family were around them, and they lived in places that they considered their homes.
I know in South Africa, religion was often a powerful tool to keep people in line too, where it was adapted to show the inferiority of other races to the white man, and I suspect something similar occurred during slavery as well.
The prison of the mind is far more effective in controlling people than the stick, so if your character loves his master, it's likely because he's grateful for his position in relation to a situation where no-one knows any different. For example, his master may allow some leniency that others don't: perhaps teaching him carpentry, brick laying or other skills. Maybe his master welcomes him into his home regularly, gives him a good place to live while many others may not be so fortunate etc. Maybe his master saved his life once when he was being attacked by those who were racist or xenophobic, or even helped deliver his slave's son.
People are complex, and while things like slavery are often portrayed in binary terms, it's never so neat as we make out when we're dealing with real people. |
10,739 | I'm currently working on a novel, in which one of the POV characters is a slave. He was born to a slave (so he was born a slave) of a rich merchant family and was treated well most of his life. One day he travels with his master to a foreign country where slavery had been abolished. The interaction with the foreign "free" people makes him doubt his position.
Might be relevant that he is of a different race than his masters, and the population of the foreign country he travels to belongs to his race.
Initially I want him to not see the injustice in his state and to love his master (they have a close relationship since they grew up together), yet I (born into a *mostly* slave-free world) have no idea how to portray him. Almost anything I try to write about him feels contrived.
How could I better identify with him?
or
Any reference to a novel (historical fiction preferred, could be any period in history) with a slave POV character (third-person preferred) will do. | 2014/04/16 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/10739",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/8048/"
] | Sounds like from the description, you are writing a "slave narrative." This was a popular literary genre in the US around the Civil War. It can either be fiction or non-fiction. One of the most famous examples and my personal suggestion is the *Life of Fredrick Douglas*. He was born a slave and later became a leader in the American Abolition Movement.
What I learned from his book is that freedom isn't inherently obvious. Before Douglas was taught to read by his master, he was very happy as a slave. His realization that he was a free-born person came slowly over time and then he was compelled to run away as slavery became an unbearable condition. The problem was not that his master was cruel, but the knowledge about the alternative. That seems to a theme in your book, so that's why I suggest it as a starting place for your research.
The WPA's Federal Writer's Project did 2300 interviews ex-slaves during the Great Depression. That research is available [here.](http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/snhtml/snhome.html) That seems like a great resource to understand what the average slave thought about slavery. | Although not a slave in the sense you're describing, I would recommend reading Nelson Mandela's first volume of his auto biography, Long Walk To Freedom.
What is quite interesting in this book is that he starts off not really seeing the injustice of his situation, or that of his people, primarily because of where he is raised, how he is raised, the education he receives, and the benefits that he gets from his situation (for example, access to education that is done to make him and other black South Africans be more like a British concept of a 'gentleman'). While he was among a small minority that could get education, the general populace were left to live as they always had, and given the "freedom" to do so.
There is one particular moment I recall in the book where Mandela is undergoing his right of passage to becoming a man in Xhosa culture, and a local chief who was the guest speaker (I forget who, apologies) gives a speech about how the Xhosa people are not free, and Mandela gets angry thinking this man is being so ungrateful for what they have.
True, Mandela was not directly a slave, or owned by someone, but the same principles apply: you grow up in a world where you don't know any better, and you're often purposefully left uneducated so you don't ask awkward questions, but given enough to improve your lot that you are grateful.
Even during slavery in America, slaves often stayed with their masters not just because of the threat of violence or intimidation, but were content with their lot, often because many didn't know anything different, were uneducated, and only knew how to perform manual labour. They had somewhere to live, food, and some were given autonomy to practise various manual skills and even hire out their skills for a wage. Their friends and family were around them, and they lived in places that they considered their homes.
I know in South Africa, religion was often a powerful tool to keep people in line too, where it was adapted to show the inferiority of other races to the white man, and I suspect something similar occurred during slavery as well.
The prison of the mind is far more effective in controlling people than the stick, so if your character loves his master, it's likely because he's grateful for his position in relation to a situation where no-one knows any different. For example, his master may allow some leniency that others don't: perhaps teaching him carpentry, brick laying or other skills. Maybe his master welcomes him into his home regularly, gives him a good place to live while many others may not be so fortunate etc. Maybe his master saved his life once when he was being attacked by those who were racist or xenophobic, or even helped deliver his slave's son.
People are complex, and while things like slavery are often portrayed in binary terms, it's never so neat as we make out when we're dealing with real people. |
10,739 | I'm currently working on a novel, in which one of the POV characters is a slave. He was born to a slave (so he was born a slave) of a rich merchant family and was treated well most of his life. One day he travels with his master to a foreign country where slavery had been abolished. The interaction with the foreign "free" people makes him doubt his position.
Might be relevant that he is of a different race than his masters, and the population of the foreign country he travels to belongs to his race.
Initially I want him to not see the injustice in his state and to love his master (they have a close relationship since they grew up together), yet I (born into a *mostly* slave-free world) have no idea how to portray him. Almost anything I try to write about him feels contrived.
How could I better identify with him?
or
Any reference to a novel (historical fiction preferred, could be any period in history) with a slave POV character (third-person preferred) will do. | 2014/04/16 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/10739",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/8048/"
] | Although not a slave in the sense you're describing, I would recommend reading Nelson Mandela's first volume of his auto biography, Long Walk To Freedom.
What is quite interesting in this book is that he starts off not really seeing the injustice of his situation, or that of his people, primarily because of where he is raised, how he is raised, the education he receives, and the benefits that he gets from his situation (for example, access to education that is done to make him and other black South Africans be more like a British concept of a 'gentleman'). While he was among a small minority that could get education, the general populace were left to live as they always had, and given the "freedom" to do so.
There is one particular moment I recall in the book where Mandela is undergoing his right of passage to becoming a man in Xhosa culture, and a local chief who was the guest speaker (I forget who, apologies) gives a speech about how the Xhosa people are not free, and Mandela gets angry thinking this man is being so ungrateful for what they have.
True, Mandela was not directly a slave, or owned by someone, but the same principles apply: you grow up in a world where you don't know any better, and you're often purposefully left uneducated so you don't ask awkward questions, but given enough to improve your lot that you are grateful.
Even during slavery in America, slaves often stayed with their masters not just because of the threat of violence or intimidation, but were content with their lot, often because many didn't know anything different, were uneducated, and only knew how to perform manual labour. They had somewhere to live, food, and some were given autonomy to practise various manual skills and even hire out their skills for a wage. Their friends and family were around them, and they lived in places that they considered their homes.
I know in South Africa, religion was often a powerful tool to keep people in line too, where it was adapted to show the inferiority of other races to the white man, and I suspect something similar occurred during slavery as well.
The prison of the mind is far more effective in controlling people than the stick, so if your character loves his master, it's likely because he's grateful for his position in relation to a situation where no-one knows any different. For example, his master may allow some leniency that others don't: perhaps teaching him carpentry, brick laying or other skills. Maybe his master welcomes him into his home regularly, gives him a good place to live while many others may not be so fortunate etc. Maybe his master saved his life once when he was being attacked by those who were racist or xenophobic, or even helped deliver his slave's son.
People are complex, and while things like slavery are often portrayed in binary terms, it's never so neat as we make out when we're dealing with real people. | I recently read a novel with this very theme: ["The Story of Jonas"](https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/maurine-f-dahlberg/the-story-of-jonas/). However, while the book was quite well written, I personally found that aspect of it --the slave who doesn't initially question his servitude --to be implausible. A better example might be Ursula LeGuin's *[The Tombs of Atuan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tombs_of_Atuan)* whose main character does not initially understand that she is oppressed because she has been led to believe she is favored.
My advice to you would be to emphasize the indoctrination process. People don't come into this world believing they are born to be servile, they learn to believe it because that's what people tell them. Show how everyone around him is constantly telling your protagonist how lucky he is, and how well-treated, and how he has advanced as high up as anyone from his race and background possibly could.
Then, when he sees counter-examples to the propaganda, you can contrast those with what he has always been told. This also offers a narrative opportunity to drive a wedge between slave and beloved master, when they respond with opposite emotions and reactions to the discovery of a functional free society composed entirely of people from the protagonists' group. |
10,739 | I'm currently working on a novel, in which one of the POV characters is a slave. He was born to a slave (so he was born a slave) of a rich merchant family and was treated well most of his life. One day he travels with his master to a foreign country where slavery had been abolished. The interaction with the foreign "free" people makes him doubt his position.
Might be relevant that he is of a different race than his masters, and the population of the foreign country he travels to belongs to his race.
Initially I want him to not see the injustice in his state and to love his master (they have a close relationship since they grew up together), yet I (born into a *mostly* slave-free world) have no idea how to portray him. Almost anything I try to write about him feels contrived.
How could I better identify with him?
or
Any reference to a novel (historical fiction preferred, could be any period in history) with a slave POV character (third-person preferred) will do. | 2014/04/16 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/10739",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/8048/"
] | If you're looking for first-hand accounts, I'd recommend [Ten Years a Slave](http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1499102534/ref=as_li_ss_il?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1499102534&linkCode=as2&tag=nonshewro0a-21). It's an autobiographical account of a free black man who was forced into slavery, and it's pretty shocking. It was also made into a (wonderful/horrific) film last year, which I'd recommend looking out for.
For a short-read, there's [A Letter to my Old Master](http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/to-my-old-master.html), a letter - believed to be real - from a freed slave to his old master, who asked him to return to work.
It's not quite a first-hand account, but I'd also recommend looking up the YouTube series Ask a Slave; it's based on the real-life, modern experiences of an actress working in a historical house, where she portrayed a slave and had to answer questions from visitors about her 'daily life'. What's quite interesting is seeing the inherent beliefs and misunderstandings people still have today about slavery and race.
Also, I don't have any books to recommend but it might be worth looking into Stockholme Syndrome and domestic abuse as well as slavery, to help with the angle of your character loving the slave owner. It might help your character feel less contrived if, instead of being naive, he's been manipulated. I think you can believe anything is 'your fault' if someone tells you so long enough.
For some more generic thoughts about your story, a person who has been raised in slavery from birth would most likely be indoctrined in the religion and custom of their slavers, which could potentially help mould the thoughts of your character. I'm not certain if your story takes place in this world? It might help your story to create some specific, rather racist religion if it doesn't, but even if it does some people have interpreted the Curse of Ham in the Bible as a condemnation of dark skin - as if it's something you're cursed with - and the Book of Mormon has mentions of God 'setting a mark upon' sinners, which has been interpreted as meaning giving them dark skin.
Now obviously that's hogswash, but if you lived in a culture of slavery, you would want to find reasons to justify your actions and ways of seeing your slaves as something lesser than you, and you could easily find meanings in religious passages to support your needs.
In Ten Years a Slave, the slave owners regularly gather the slaves to listen to Christian sermons and speeches, and if you were brought up having people read from important-sounding books every day, and explaining that the passages mean you're indebted to them, you might well believe it yourself.
However, I think the older you got, the more difficult it would be to believe. As What said, you would most likely be aware of the injustice. I think it would be entirely human to ask, 'Why me? What's the difference between me and my master?' You would compare yourself to them, especially if you were brought up together, and I'm sure more than once you'd see injustice directly, even if it was small - say he hit you with a stick or stole sweets from the pantry. When *his* skin didn't 'darken' and he wasn't beaten, you would have to question why.
It gets harder if there are more slaves, as there are likely to be, as you would be exposed to more points of view which would likely be different, and it would be very easy to be jaded and bitter from very early on. Even 'kind' masters didn't treat their slaves *well*; a slave is a slave.
I don't know how grim a story yours is, but in American slavery, we have accounts of children being taken away from parents and sold, and young women being raped; it would be pretty easy to see the injustice there.
Still, as Craig pointed out, some slaves in America stayed with their masters because it was the only life they'd known - a home and daily meals (and not being killed for running away) would seem the sensible option to many people. That doesn't mean they were *happy*. It's not really comparable but just as an example of human psychology, in 2011 Gallup reported 71% of American workers hate their jobs - I think it's fair to say a lot of people, no matter the situation, will take the devil they know.
I think there's a very interesting and complex psychology there to explore. Good luck! | I recently read a novel with this very theme: ["The Story of Jonas"](https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/maurine-f-dahlberg/the-story-of-jonas/). However, while the book was quite well written, I personally found that aspect of it --the slave who doesn't initially question his servitude --to be implausible. A better example might be Ursula LeGuin's *[The Tombs of Atuan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tombs_of_Atuan)* whose main character does not initially understand that she is oppressed because she has been led to believe she is favored.
My advice to you would be to emphasize the indoctrination process. People don't come into this world believing they are born to be servile, they learn to believe it because that's what people tell them. Show how everyone around him is constantly telling your protagonist how lucky he is, and how well-treated, and how he has advanced as high up as anyone from his race and background possibly could.
Then, when he sees counter-examples to the propaganda, you can contrast those with what he has always been told. This also offers a narrative opportunity to drive a wedge between slave and beloved master, when they respond with opposite emotions and reactions to the discovery of a functional free society composed entirely of people from the protagonists' group. |
10,739 | I'm currently working on a novel, in which one of the POV characters is a slave. He was born to a slave (so he was born a slave) of a rich merchant family and was treated well most of his life. One day he travels with his master to a foreign country where slavery had been abolished. The interaction with the foreign "free" people makes him doubt his position.
Might be relevant that he is of a different race than his masters, and the population of the foreign country he travels to belongs to his race.
Initially I want him to not see the injustice in his state and to love his master (they have a close relationship since they grew up together), yet I (born into a *mostly* slave-free world) have no idea how to portray him. Almost anything I try to write about him feels contrived.
How could I better identify with him?
or
Any reference to a novel (historical fiction preferred, could be any period in history) with a slave POV character (third-person preferred) will do. | 2014/04/16 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/10739",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/8048/"
] | Sounds like from the description, you are writing a "slave narrative." This was a popular literary genre in the US around the Civil War. It can either be fiction or non-fiction. One of the most famous examples and my personal suggestion is the *Life of Fredrick Douglas*. He was born a slave and later became a leader in the American Abolition Movement.
What I learned from his book is that freedom isn't inherently obvious. Before Douglas was taught to read by his master, he was very happy as a slave. His realization that he was a free-born person came slowly over time and then he was compelled to run away as slavery became an unbearable condition. The problem was not that his master was cruel, but the knowledge about the alternative. That seems to a theme in your book, so that's why I suggest it as a starting place for your research.
The WPA's Federal Writer's Project did 2300 interviews ex-slaves during the Great Depression. That research is available [here.](http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/snhtml/snhome.html) That seems like a great resource to understand what the average slave thought about slavery. | I recently read a novel with this very theme: ["The Story of Jonas"](https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/maurine-f-dahlberg/the-story-of-jonas/). However, while the book was quite well written, I personally found that aspect of it --the slave who doesn't initially question his servitude --to be implausible. A better example might be Ursula LeGuin's *[The Tombs of Atuan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tombs_of_Atuan)* whose main character does not initially understand that she is oppressed because she has been led to believe she is favored.
My advice to you would be to emphasize the indoctrination process. People don't come into this world believing they are born to be servile, they learn to believe it because that's what people tell them. Show how everyone around him is constantly telling your protagonist how lucky he is, and how well-treated, and how he has advanced as high up as anyone from his race and background possibly could.
Then, when he sees counter-examples to the propaganda, you can contrast those with what he has always been told. This also offers a narrative opportunity to drive a wedge between slave and beloved master, when they respond with opposite emotions and reactions to the discovery of a functional free society composed entirely of people from the protagonists' group. |
61,925 | I am having troubles understanding utilitarianism a little bit, and have posed this question to a number of people and been met mostly with bafflement about how I cannot see the error in my proposed claim. But, when they explain against it, I cannot see the soundness of their argument. So, I am willing to accept that there is an essential error I am making in my reasoning, and am making this post in the hopes that someone will be able to point it out.
People like to say against utilitarianism the idea of inalienable rights. We believe people should have them, not because they will increase pleasure/decrease pain in the aggregate, but for some other given reason. Despite the fact that 30 people being run over by a bus is a much more unpleasurable result than one person being run over, we still (some of us) do not think it right to push that person in front of the bus to save the 30. Not advocating for this, just as a proposed counter-argument.
My question is: if we say that inalienable rights are valuable, are we not just simply choosing a different kind of pleasure that we place value on? People should have inalienable rights, and the value of a society which upholds these rights (with that value being determined by the consummate pleasure that comes with having inalienable rights, as compared to not having them) we consider to be a greater point value (+100 points of pleasure) versus the 30 people surviving the bus crash (+50 points of pleasure).
Or, if I refuse to torture one person to save two people from being tortured. Some might call me a Kantian, or some other thing, but not a utilitarian. But am I not just saying that the point value of the displeasure that comes from taking it upon myself to torture the one person (perhaps I believe that humans do not have that right, only God does) is -1 trillion versus the (granted) still very large point value of saving the other 2 (-1 billion)?
I had someone say, ok, well that is no longer about the aggregate. That is about the one person saving their self the -1 trillion points value. But for the person making this decision, isn't the idea that a society in which these decisions are made by people (and not God, say) substantially worse than even half of that society getting killed off? Like, if I think there are personal moral laws that absolutely cannot be transgressed, I only think that because I believe acting in a contrary way will be extremely unpleasurable (be it spiritually, emotionally, or for the greater society). And perhaps I believe that a society of people that have license to kill off the one for the many is damaged in a way that is way worse for the aggregate than half of its population dying.
I almost wonder if this can't be distilled to: for any value claim, is there not a normative claim attached necessarily? I believe this is the is/ought debate, right? If I refrain from doing something that I think is bad, is it not always because I also believe that everyone doing that thing would also be bad, which means utilitarianism can't be escaped? Any normative belief I have is also a belief that the aggregate is better off (i.e. experiences more pleasure or less displeasure) for having this. | 2019/04/17 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/61925",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/30741/"
] | The difference is that a utilitarian who endorses inalienable rights can conceive of a world in which that endorsement ends up morally wrong, even if our actual world endorses inalienable rights. By contrast, deontologists about rights say such a world is quite literally inconceivable. Indeed, on a basic utilitarian analysis, we can imagine a case in which inalienable rights are *unjustified*, even if such a case never obtains. In a world in which the enforcement of a right led to negative utility in the aggregate, it would have to be admitted that the prescription of utilitarianism in this case would be not only that violation of the right was permissible but *obligatory*. The deontologist about rights says such a situation is quite literally inconceivable: there is no possible world in which it is morally permissible to violate the right of another. Hence, talk of inalienable rights in utilitarianism reduces to shorthand for talk about utility. The deontologist would argue that this is unacceptable: rights are valuable not for their utility but because they, say, preserve human dignity.
Now you might want to then pose the question: why do we want to preserve human dignity in the first place? And you might want to argue: we want to preserve human dignity because societies that preserve human dignity tend to lead to greater aggregate utility. This would be a particular theory, but you can't simply assert that this is what's going on, you'd have to argue for that claim.
My sense is that you are confusing *ethical* and *psychological* hedonism. A psychologist, for example, might be able to collect data to support the claim that---as a matter of empirical fact---most people reason in a hedonist-utilitarian fashion about moral matters, even if they don't explicitly hold utilitarianism as a moral theory or even if they explicitly hold some competing moral theory (such as deontology or virtue ethics). In other words, it may be that what in fact motivates us psychologically is pleasure and pain. Hence, it may be that, statistically speaking, the reason most people end up behaving in such a way that endorses inalienable rights is based on utilitarian considerations. But that is a separate matter from whether utilitarianism can actually give us a theory that *grounds* the value of inalienable rights.
Hence, this quote:
>
> Like, if I think there are personal moral laws that absolutely cannot be transgressed, I only think that because I believe acting in a contrary way will be extremely unpleasurable (be it spiritually, emotionally, or for the greater society).
>
>
>
...is the kind of hanging chad in your case. You claim that the only reason you believe in a moral law is because you in turn believe that acting in a way contrary to that law will lead to negative utility. But have you really separated out psychological from ethical hedonism here? Do you just take it that your behaviors *are* motivated by pleasure and pain? if so, that means you're a psychological hedonist. But *ought* your actions be motivated by pleasure and pain? Well that's a different question, and to jump from psychological to ethical hedonism is simply begging the question in favor of utilitarianism. First you need to clearly separate in your mind the question of how people psychologically deliberate about things, from the question of moral value. You would need to make the case that moral laws are *grounded* in utility, rather than just argue that people in fact reason in utilitarian ways. Indeed, Mill tries to do this himself when he claims that all Kant's derivations of moral duties from the categorical imperative implicitly rely on reasoning about the aggregate consequences of an action on the resulting world in which such moral laws were implemented globally and without exception. | Your objection of inalienable rights against utilitarianism is perfectly sound. I would be very interested in reading about the opposite arguments that did not convince you.
One very common trait of utilitarian thought experiment is that they put their subject in the acting role: the one who chooses who gets under the bus, but almost never the one acted upon, the one being pushed. I personally find very telling the case study of the *involuntary organ donor*:
>
> A person is being drugged on the operation table for a very benign
> surgery and sleeps. just before the operation begins ambulances
> arrive, with on board several people who got caught in an accident.
> Those people will die until they are being transplanted with new
> kidneys, heart, lungs, livers. The only timely available source of
> fresh organs is the person sleeping on the table. No time to wake him
> up and ask for his opinion: either the doctor takes his organs,
> killing him and saving the injured, or he lives and the injured are
> declared DOA. What should be done ?
>
>
>
This experiment has many variations: the injured people are Nobel prizes whose research will undoubtedly save thousands of lives, the drugged patient is a Nobel prize, the drugged patient is your daughter... But 99% of the time I heard it, it puts the subject in the role of the doctor making the decision.
It is a shame, as the real moral and politic dilemmas arise when the subject is in fact the drugged patient: *"you are the drugged patient, do you accept to live in a society where people who go to the hospital for a benign operation face the possibility of being sliced open without consent and never wake up in order to save several others ?"* I sure would not.
This configuration raises the same questions you do by opposing the value of inalienable rights against the direct utility gained by, say, torturing a person: it is clear, or at least it can't be simply hand waved, that a society where people can be acted upon without consent, including the sacrifice of their life, to maximize general utility is not desirable. Therefore limits exists to what can productively be done in order to maximize utility. And the idea of giving to any subject the possibility to oppose beeing acted upon to preserve their personal utility is equivalent to what you could call inalienable rights.
It must be acknowledged here that this argument's soundness depends on one's metaphysical world view. For example, if one believes that such a sacrifice can grant them better karma or a place in paradise, their utility is maximized as well and the ethical problem solved. But people who do not believe in afterlife can rightfully oppose that making the world a better place by sacrificing their life is meaningless if they can't enjoy it anyway. It is a sound logical position to prefer living in a somewhat crappy world and still enjoy what is left to enjoy rather than making it the best possible at the cost of not enjoying it. Yet this only highlights one of the dead angle of many utilitarians, which is that the measure of utility ultimately depends on metaphysical considerations that can't be universally agreed upon (at least it was never agreed upon so far).
Now, please note that the concept of inalienable rights defined above is in no way Kantian. There is no absolute imperative at play here, but pure subjectivity: "I don't care if the utility for the society is maximal if it makes my life too short or too crappy to enjoy it myself" says the subject. Yet this subjectivity can be shared by anyone, and as a least common denominator it is somewhat universal. Being universal, it is the closest thing utilitarians can get to base their value system upon, and therefore no utilitarian view is complete without taking into account the liberties of each individual.
I think objections like yours demonstrate that utilitarianism, albeit a useful rule of thumb, is not the "one size fits all" objective moral standard it is often advertised to be, and that a "utilitarian tyranny", even if ruled by the most objective of leaders, say an AI, would certainly be more of a dystopia. |
67,366,685 | I am running an Angular Application I am getting these popup in vs code whenever I am opening it. However, the ng serve command is working fine and it's serving(running) the app successfully.
But I am getting this error in console.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mX73o.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uJkvM.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I1exq.png) | 2021/05/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/67366685",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/13975105/"
] | Angular Language Service Extension has one bug which is reported to their git repository.
My solution will work for Angular Projects which is running < Version 9.0
To resolve this issue you have two ways.
Solution 1: Downgrade extension version
1. Downgrade [https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Angular.ng-template](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) to 11.2.14
2. Remove Node Module
3. Run npm install
4. Run npm start or ng serve
Solution 2: (For Version 12)
1. Open Vs Code
2. Go To Files ==> Preference ==> Setting
3. Under Extension Select Use Legacy View Engine Checkbox.
4. Run npm start (If you're facing any issue then kindly close VS Code and Remove
node\_modules folder and Run npm install
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) | it might be some version inconsistency problem. It was in my case.
Had same symptoms: I opened a folder in Visual Studio Code and after few secons I got the same message, but also VSC did not recognize any of angular tags. On the other hand, it did run without problems on my other computer...
I reinstalled VS, angular, nodejs, nothing helped, then the last thing I did is upate all packages in package.json to latest, fixed some code (because of changes in new packages) and now it works!
br, Marjan |
67,366,685 | I am running an Angular Application I am getting these popup in vs code whenever I am opening it. However, the ng serve command is working fine and it's serving(running) the app successfully.
But I am getting this error in console.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mX73o.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uJkvM.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I1exq.png) | 2021/05/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/67366685",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/13975105/"
] | Angular Language Service Extension has one bug which is reported to their git repository.
My solution will work for Angular Projects which is running < Version 9.0
To resolve this issue you have two ways.
Solution 1: Downgrade extension version
1. Downgrade [https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Angular.ng-template](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) to 11.2.14
2. Remove Node Module
3. Run npm install
4. Run npm start or ng serve
Solution 2: (For Version 12)
1. Open Vs Code
2. Go To Files ==> Preference ==> Setting
3. Under Extension Select Use Legacy View Engine Checkbox.
4. Run npm start (If you're facing any issue then kindly close VS Code and Remove
node\_modules folder and Run npm install
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) | reinstall vscode extension Angular Language Service@v11.2.14 resolve my problem. |
67,366,685 | I am running an Angular Application I am getting these popup in vs code whenever I am opening it. However, the ng serve command is working fine and it's serving(running) the app successfully.
But I am getting this error in console.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mX73o.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uJkvM.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I1exq.png) | 2021/05/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/67366685",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/13975105/"
] | Angular Language Service Extension has one bug which is reported to their git repository.
My solution will work for Angular Projects which is running < Version 9.0
To resolve this issue you have two ways.
Solution 1: Downgrade extension version
1. Downgrade [https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Angular.ng-template](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) to 11.2.14
2. Remove Node Module
3. Run npm install
4. Run npm start or ng serve
Solution 2: (For Version 12)
1. Open Vs Code
2. Go To Files ==> Preference ==> Setting
3. Under Extension Select Use Legacy View Engine Checkbox.
4. Run npm start (If you're facing any issue then kindly close VS Code and Remove
node\_modules folder and Run npm install
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wyMlG.png) | In my case it is a problem of vs code editor, and the solution is
1. Go to VS code settings and search for settings.json file.
2. In settings.json file add this line "extensions.autoUpdate": false, (as in below image)
[Settings.json file changes](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LPMio.png)
3. Now go to angular language service extension settings in market place and install the previous stable version.
This should resolve your error. |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | It depends on the series that is under consideration.
Typically, a 'nest' of vampires is used by mortals who are exterminating vampires - Blade, Buffy, etc will use the term. This plays into their human desire to distance their foes from humanity.
In works where vampires are portrayed more sympathetically, every effort is made to 'humanize' the vampires (or make them 'better than human').
I'm unable to find a reference to the first usage of 'nest' to refer to a group of vampires. The earliest I can recall is Blade (or possibly John Carpenter's Vampires) but both of those are fairly recent (in terms of movies). | The first time I encountered the term was in the movie The Lost Boys (1987). |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | It depends on the series that is under consideration.
Typically, a 'nest' of vampires is used by mortals who are exterminating vampires - Blade, Buffy, etc will use the term. This plays into their human desire to distance their foes from humanity.
In works where vampires are portrayed more sympathetically, every effort is made to 'humanize' the vampires (or make them 'better than human').
I'm unable to find a reference to the first usage of 'nest' to refer to a group of vampires. The earliest I can recall is Blade (or possibly John Carpenter's Vampires) but both of those are fairly recent (in terms of movies). | the word has different connotations in different works mainly because there are different kinds of vampires
john carpenters vampires had a "queen" vampire that had a psychic link to his children (its been awhile but I think the sired vampires had a basic drone level of intelligence as well)
in true blood Nests are described by Bill as causing the vampires living in them to become more cruel the behavior could be mystical or it could just be behavioral reinforcement
buffy and angel both referenced nests but I dont think they meant anything more than a place where a group of vampires lived (unlived) together. they also used the word nest to refer to things other than vampires
personally I always kinda assumed the word nest was the proper way to refer to a group of vampires, kinda like a murder of crows or a waddle of penguins
as to the first usage I cant help you |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | It depends on the series that is under consideration.
Typically, a 'nest' of vampires is used by mortals who are exterminating vampires - Blade, Buffy, etc will use the term. This plays into their human desire to distance their foes from humanity.
In works where vampires are portrayed more sympathetically, every effort is made to 'humanize' the vampires (or make them 'better than human').
I'm unable to find a reference to the first usage of 'nest' to refer to a group of vampires. The earliest I can recall is Blade (or possibly John Carpenter's Vampires) but both of those are fairly recent (in terms of movies). | I think it is similar to a wasps' nest -- not something cozy but rather like what animals would build. For example, in the Fright Night remake (and maybe in the original, I don't recall) the head vampire simple stores his brood in the basement -- it is a practical place for them, out of the light but they have no comforts nor do they need them -- presumably the head vampire just throws victims to them occasionally and then they emerge from holes in the wall or floor. |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | First mention of the phrase I could find:
Percy MacKaye's "[The Canterbury Pilgrims](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canterbury_Pilgrims)" play (1903)
>
> Oh, monstrous brood, hatched in a vampire's nest ! But I will be revenged
>
>
>
As far as what a nest is, it depends on the work in question. "Night/Day Watch" series by Lukyanenko defined a nest as vampires initiated by a given "originating" vampire - that is a frequent interpretation. | The first time I encountered the term was in the movie The Lost Boys (1987). |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | First mention of the phrase I could find:
Percy MacKaye's "[The Canterbury Pilgrims](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canterbury_Pilgrims)" play (1903)
>
> Oh, monstrous brood, hatched in a vampire's nest ! But I will be revenged
>
>
>
As far as what a nest is, it depends on the work in question. "Night/Day Watch" series by Lukyanenko defined a nest as vampires initiated by a given "originating" vampire - that is a frequent interpretation. | the word has different connotations in different works mainly because there are different kinds of vampires
john carpenters vampires had a "queen" vampire that had a psychic link to his children (its been awhile but I think the sired vampires had a basic drone level of intelligence as well)
in true blood Nests are described by Bill as causing the vampires living in them to become more cruel the behavior could be mystical or it could just be behavioral reinforcement
buffy and angel both referenced nests but I dont think they meant anything more than a place where a group of vampires lived (unlived) together. they also used the word nest to refer to things other than vampires
personally I always kinda assumed the word nest was the proper way to refer to a group of vampires, kinda like a murder of crows or a waddle of penguins
as to the first usage I cant help you |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | First mention of the phrase I could find:
Percy MacKaye's "[The Canterbury Pilgrims](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canterbury_Pilgrims)" play (1903)
>
> Oh, monstrous brood, hatched in a vampire's nest ! But I will be revenged
>
>
>
As far as what a nest is, it depends on the work in question. "Night/Day Watch" series by Lukyanenko defined a nest as vampires initiated by a given "originating" vampire - that is a frequent interpretation. | I think it is similar to a wasps' nest -- not something cozy but rather like what animals would build. For example, in the Fright Night remake (and maybe in the original, I don't recall) the head vampire simple stores his brood in the basement -- it is a practical place for them, out of the light but they have no comforts nor do they need them -- presumably the head vampire just throws victims to them occasionally and then they emerge from holes in the wall or floor. |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | the word has different connotations in different works mainly because there are different kinds of vampires
john carpenters vampires had a "queen" vampire that had a psychic link to his children (its been awhile but I think the sired vampires had a basic drone level of intelligence as well)
in true blood Nests are described by Bill as causing the vampires living in them to become more cruel the behavior could be mystical or it could just be behavioral reinforcement
buffy and angel both referenced nests but I dont think they meant anything more than a place where a group of vampires lived (unlived) together. they also used the word nest to refer to things other than vampires
personally I always kinda assumed the word nest was the proper way to refer to a group of vampires, kinda like a murder of crows or a waddle of penguins
as to the first usage I cant help you | The first time I encountered the term was in the movie The Lost Boys (1987). |
13,238 | What constitutes a vampire "nest"? Is it just the home of several vampires, or does it have to actually be "nest" like (i.e. dirty, dark, stinky, unpleasant)?
For instance, I've never seen the Cullen's house referred to as a nest, since they're sort of civilized. But in the first season of True Blood there were three vampires living in a house and it was referred to as a nest. Is there a distinction? Or just the preference of the author writing the vampires? Is Jean Claude's building in the Anita Blake series considered a nest?
Also, what is the first mention of a 'vampire nest' in fiction? | 2012/03/16 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/13238",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/3102/"
] | I think it is similar to a wasps' nest -- not something cozy but rather like what animals would build. For example, in the Fright Night remake (and maybe in the original, I don't recall) the head vampire simple stores his brood in the basement -- it is a practical place for them, out of the light but they have no comforts nor do they need them -- presumably the head vampire just throws victims to them occasionally and then they emerge from holes in the wall or floor. | The first time I encountered the term was in the movie The Lost Boys (1987). |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | John gives a more detailed description of this aspect of the crucifixion than either Mark or Mathew:
>
> And they crucify Him, and divide His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot for them *to decide* who should take what. (Mark 15:24 DLNT)
>
>
> And having crucified Him, they divided His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot.
>
> (Matthew 27:35 DLNT)
>
>
> Then the soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts— a part *for* each soldier— and the tunic. Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top through *the* whole. So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but let us cast-lots for it *to decide* whose it will be”— in order that the Scripture [in Ps 22:18] might be fulfilled, the *one* saying, “They divided My garments among themselves, and they cast a lot for My clothing”. So indeed, the soldiers did these *things*. (John 19:23-24 DLNT)
>
>
>
Writing after both Mark and Matthew, John completes the record of how the clothing of Jesus was divided. This account is purposeful to include three pieces of information:
1. The Old Testament passage fulfilled
2. The number of pieces of clothing (five)
3. Identifying the piece of clothing which was not torn (a tunic - χιτὼν)
As noted by User34445 John makes the point that both aspects of Psalm 22:18 were fulfilled: the clothing was divided **and** lots were cast for the garments. In addition, there is a difference between the Masoretic Text (MT) and that John which cites:
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> They divide my clothes among themselves **casting lots** for my garments. (JPS Translation)
>
> They divided My garments among themselves, and they **cast a lot** for My clothing. (DLNT)
>
>
>
The Hebrew is plural (lots). John states a single lot was cast. This difference shows John has the Septuagint version of Psalm 22 in mind:
>
> John 19:23:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (NA28)
>
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (LXX)
>
>
>
John's citation is verbatim.
The singular casting of a lot does not materially affect the fulfillment of the Psalm. It shows John is pointing the reader to the Greek text of the OT.
The article of clothing which was preserved in one piece is specifically a tunic [[χιτών]](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5509&t=KJV) which is found in some significant places. Two in particular:
* This was the piece of clothing the LORD made for the first man and woman when they left the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:21).
+ Just as the first man received a tunic from the LORD God; one of the Roman soldiers received a tunic from the Lord Jesus.
* The garment for the High Priest (Exodus 28:4).
+ Jesus is the true High Priest (e.g. Hebrews 10:21)
The emphasis on not tearing the garment invites a comparison to the clothing of the High Priest which is not supposed to be torn:
>
> The priest who is chief among his brothers, on whose head the anointing oil is poured and who has been consecrated to wear the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose nor tear his clothes. (Leviticus 21:10 ESV) 1
>
>
>
In particular, there is a connection to the High Priest is found on the Day of Atonement:
>
> He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. (Leviticus 16:4 ESV)
>
>
> καὶ **χιτῶνα** λινοῦν ἡγιασμένον ἐνδύσεται καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ ζώνῃ λινῇ ζώσεται καὶ κίδαριν λινῆν περιθήσεται ἱμάτια ἅγιά ἐστιν καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται αὐτά (LXX)
>
>
>
The tunic is removed and left in the Holy Place:
>
> “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. (Leviticus 16:23 ESV)
>
>
>
Therefore Mark and Matthew record the tearing of the Temple veil opening the entrance to the Most Holy Place and John presents Jesus as the High Priest, who is and makes the sacrifice and leaves His tunic outside the Most Holy Place.
---
1. The crown of thorns fulfills this requirement | I believe that the tunic that was not torn represents the Apostolic gift (John 19:23-24). We have the 5 fold ministry, where the Apostolic gift embraces all the other 4 (Ephesians 4:11-13). The purple tunic represents the entire operation. We should embrace all the other gifts so that the Apostolic foundation can work effectively. (Ephessians 2:20) |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | I believe that the tunic that was not torn represents the Apostolic gift (John 19:23-24). We have the 5 fold ministry, where the Apostolic gift embraces all the other 4 (Ephesians 4:11-13). The purple tunic represents the entire operation. We should embrace all the other gifts so that the Apostolic foundation can work effectively. (Ephessians 2:20) | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | '**The tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom**'. That's what "*sewn from the top*" means. It's a special type of weaving - something akin to seamless knitting (on circular needles) except through weaving.
Weaving a seamless garment was a special skill, out of the ordinary and exceedingly rare - so quite valuable. This detail implies the garment was specially woven for Yehshua, perhaps even the product of a mother's hand, or possibly a close follower - like Mary Magdalene.
>
> Notice the prophecy in **Psalm 22:18** - ***They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment***.
> This prophesy contains two details:
>
>
> * They divide my clothes among them; and
> * {they} cast lots for my garment.
>
>
> Why divide **AND** cast lots?
>
>
> **ANSWER**: The detail contained in **Matthew 27:3** provides the answer to the riddle of **Psalm 22:18**. The clothes that could be divided were divided, yet one was seamless *sewn from the top* and quite valuable so sought after. Lots were drawn for the tunic because of its value.
>
>
> | What does it signify to tear Christ's robe into 4 pieces? Explainations given do not give the meaning ?
Its the question am asking |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | John gives a more detailed description of this aspect of the crucifixion than either Mark or Mathew:
>
> And they crucify Him, and divide His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot for them *to decide* who should take what. (Mark 15:24 DLNT)
>
>
> And having crucified Him, they divided His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot.
>
> (Matthew 27:35 DLNT)
>
>
> Then the soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts— a part *for* each soldier— and the tunic. Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top through *the* whole. So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but let us cast-lots for it *to decide* whose it will be”— in order that the Scripture [in Ps 22:18] might be fulfilled, the *one* saying, “They divided My garments among themselves, and they cast a lot for My clothing”. So indeed, the soldiers did these *things*. (John 19:23-24 DLNT)
>
>
>
Writing after both Mark and Matthew, John completes the record of how the clothing of Jesus was divided. This account is purposeful to include three pieces of information:
1. The Old Testament passage fulfilled
2. The number of pieces of clothing (five)
3. Identifying the piece of clothing which was not torn (a tunic - χιτὼν)
As noted by User34445 John makes the point that both aspects of Psalm 22:18 were fulfilled: the clothing was divided **and** lots were cast for the garments. In addition, there is a difference between the Masoretic Text (MT) and that John which cites:
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> They divide my clothes among themselves **casting lots** for my garments. (JPS Translation)
>
> They divided My garments among themselves, and they **cast a lot** for My clothing. (DLNT)
>
>
>
The Hebrew is plural (lots). John states a single lot was cast. This difference shows John has the Septuagint version of Psalm 22 in mind:
>
> John 19:23:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (NA28)
>
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (LXX)
>
>
>
John's citation is verbatim.
The singular casting of a lot does not materially affect the fulfillment of the Psalm. It shows John is pointing the reader to the Greek text of the OT.
The article of clothing which was preserved in one piece is specifically a tunic [[χιτών]](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5509&t=KJV) which is found in some significant places. Two in particular:
* This was the piece of clothing the LORD made for the first man and woman when they left the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:21).
+ Just as the first man received a tunic from the LORD God; one of the Roman soldiers received a tunic from the Lord Jesus.
* The garment for the High Priest (Exodus 28:4).
+ Jesus is the true High Priest (e.g. Hebrews 10:21)
The emphasis on not tearing the garment invites a comparison to the clothing of the High Priest which is not supposed to be torn:
>
> The priest who is chief among his brothers, on whose head the anointing oil is poured and who has been consecrated to wear the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose nor tear his clothes. (Leviticus 21:10 ESV) 1
>
>
>
In particular, there is a connection to the High Priest is found on the Day of Atonement:
>
> He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. (Leviticus 16:4 ESV)
>
>
> καὶ **χιτῶνα** λινοῦν ἡγιασμένον ἐνδύσεται καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ ζώνῃ λινῇ ζώσεται καὶ κίδαριν λινῆν περιθήσεται ἱμάτια ἅγιά ἐστιν καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται αὐτά (LXX)
>
>
>
The tunic is removed and left in the Holy Place:
>
> “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. (Leviticus 16:23 ESV)
>
>
>
Therefore Mark and Matthew record the tearing of the Temple veil opening the entrance to the Most Holy Place and John presents Jesus as the High Priest, who is and makes the sacrifice and leaves His tunic outside the Most Holy Place.
---
1. The crown of thorns fulfills this requirement | The garment had no seams , representing there is no hole or crack in which to enter Heaven or be saved but only through Jesus Christ and his sacrifice and grace . When Jesus entered the throne to His Father He was given the garment of holiness and praise and we will also . Casting lots or trying to buy your way into salvation or enter through any other way besides the blood of Jesus will not save you ! Only through accepting His sacrifice and cleansing blood can we be saved |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | What does it signify to tear Christ's robe into 4 pieces? Explainations given do not give the meaning ?
Its the question am asking | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | '**The tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom**'. That's what "*sewn from the top*" means. It's a special type of weaving - something akin to seamless knitting (on circular needles) except through weaving.
Weaving a seamless garment was a special skill, out of the ordinary and exceedingly rare - so quite valuable. This detail implies the garment was specially woven for Yehshua, perhaps even the product of a mother's hand, or possibly a close follower - like Mary Magdalene.
>
> Notice the prophecy in **Psalm 22:18** - ***They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment***.
> This prophesy contains two details:
>
>
> * They divide my clothes among them; and
> * {they} cast lots for my garment.
>
>
> Why divide **AND** cast lots?
>
>
> **ANSWER**: The detail contained in **Matthew 27:3** provides the answer to the riddle of **Psalm 22:18**. The clothes that could be divided were divided, yet one was seamless *sewn from the top* and quite valuable so sought after. Lots were drawn for the tunic because of its value.
>
>
> | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | John gives a more detailed description of this aspect of the crucifixion than either Mark or Mathew:
>
> And they crucify Him, and divide His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot for them *to decide* who should take what. (Mark 15:24 DLNT)
>
>
> And having crucified Him, they divided His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot.
>
> (Matthew 27:35 DLNT)
>
>
> Then the soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts— a part *for* each soldier— and the tunic. Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top through *the* whole. So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but let us cast-lots for it *to decide* whose it will be”— in order that the Scripture [in Ps 22:18] might be fulfilled, the *one* saying, “They divided My garments among themselves, and they cast a lot for My clothing”. So indeed, the soldiers did these *things*. (John 19:23-24 DLNT)
>
>
>
Writing after both Mark and Matthew, John completes the record of how the clothing of Jesus was divided. This account is purposeful to include three pieces of information:
1. The Old Testament passage fulfilled
2. The number of pieces of clothing (five)
3. Identifying the piece of clothing which was not torn (a tunic - χιτὼν)
As noted by User34445 John makes the point that both aspects of Psalm 22:18 were fulfilled: the clothing was divided **and** lots were cast for the garments. In addition, there is a difference between the Masoretic Text (MT) and that John which cites:
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> They divide my clothes among themselves **casting lots** for my garments. (JPS Translation)
>
> They divided My garments among themselves, and they **cast a lot** for My clothing. (DLNT)
>
>
>
The Hebrew is plural (lots). John states a single lot was cast. This difference shows John has the Septuagint version of Psalm 22 in mind:
>
> John 19:23:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (NA28)
>
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (LXX)
>
>
>
John's citation is verbatim.
The singular casting of a lot does not materially affect the fulfillment of the Psalm. It shows John is pointing the reader to the Greek text of the OT.
The article of clothing which was preserved in one piece is specifically a tunic [[χιτών]](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5509&t=KJV) which is found in some significant places. Two in particular:
* This was the piece of clothing the LORD made for the first man and woman when they left the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:21).
+ Just as the first man received a tunic from the LORD God; one of the Roman soldiers received a tunic from the Lord Jesus.
* The garment for the High Priest (Exodus 28:4).
+ Jesus is the true High Priest (e.g. Hebrews 10:21)
The emphasis on not tearing the garment invites a comparison to the clothing of the High Priest which is not supposed to be torn:
>
> The priest who is chief among his brothers, on whose head the anointing oil is poured and who has been consecrated to wear the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose nor tear his clothes. (Leviticus 21:10 ESV) 1
>
>
>
In particular, there is a connection to the High Priest is found on the Day of Atonement:
>
> He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. (Leviticus 16:4 ESV)
>
>
> καὶ **χιτῶνα** λινοῦν ἡγιασμένον ἐνδύσεται καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ ζώνῃ λινῇ ζώσεται καὶ κίδαριν λινῆν περιθήσεται ἱμάτια ἅγιά ἐστιν καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται αὐτά (LXX)
>
>
>
The tunic is removed and left in the Holy Place:
>
> “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. (Leviticus 16:23 ESV)
>
>
>
Therefore Mark and Matthew record the tearing of the Temple veil opening the entrance to the Most Holy Place and John presents Jesus as the High Priest, who is and makes the sacrifice and leaves His tunic outside the Most Holy Place.
---
1. The crown of thorns fulfills this requirement | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | John gives a more detailed description of this aspect of the crucifixion than either Mark or Mathew:
>
> And they crucify Him, and divide His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot for them *to decide* who should take what. (Mark 15:24 DLNT)
>
>
> And having crucified Him, they divided His garments among *themselves*, casting a lot.
>
> (Matthew 27:35 DLNT)
>
>
> Then the soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts— a part *for* each soldier— and the tunic. Now the tunic was seamless, woven from the top through *the* whole. So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but let us cast-lots for it *to decide* whose it will be”— in order that the Scripture [in Ps 22:18] might be fulfilled, the *one* saying, “They divided My garments among themselves, and they cast a lot for My clothing”. So indeed, the soldiers did these *things*. (John 19:23-24 DLNT)
>
>
>
Writing after both Mark and Matthew, John completes the record of how the clothing of Jesus was divided. This account is purposeful to include three pieces of information:
1. The Old Testament passage fulfilled
2. The number of pieces of clothing (five)
3. Identifying the piece of clothing which was not torn (a tunic - χιτὼν)
As noted by User34445 John makes the point that both aspects of Psalm 22:18 were fulfilled: the clothing was divided **and** lots were cast for the garments. In addition, there is a difference between the Masoretic Text (MT) and that John which cites:
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> They divide my clothes among themselves **casting lots** for my garments. (JPS Translation)
>
> They divided My garments among themselves, and they **cast a lot** for My clothing. (DLNT)
>
>
>
The Hebrew is plural (lots). John states a single lot was cast. This difference shows John has the Septuagint version of Psalm 22 in mind:
>
> John 19:23:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (NA28)
>
>
> Psalm 22:18:
>
> διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον (LXX)
>
>
>
John's citation is verbatim.
The singular casting of a lot does not materially affect the fulfillment of the Psalm. It shows John is pointing the reader to the Greek text of the OT.
The article of clothing which was preserved in one piece is specifically a tunic [[χιτών]](https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5509&t=KJV) which is found in some significant places. Two in particular:
* This was the piece of clothing the LORD made for the first man and woman when they left the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:21).
+ Just as the first man received a tunic from the LORD God; one of the Roman soldiers received a tunic from the Lord Jesus.
* The garment for the High Priest (Exodus 28:4).
+ Jesus is the true High Priest (e.g. Hebrews 10:21)
The emphasis on not tearing the garment invites a comparison to the clothing of the High Priest which is not supposed to be torn:
>
> The priest who is chief among his brothers, on whose head the anointing oil is poured and who has been consecrated to wear the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose nor tear his clothes. (Leviticus 21:10 ESV) 1
>
>
>
In particular, there is a connection to the High Priest is found on the Day of Atonement:
>
> He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. (Leviticus 16:4 ESV)
>
>
> καὶ **χιτῶνα** λινοῦν ἡγιασμένον ἐνδύσεται καὶ περισκελὲς λινοῦν ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ ζώνῃ λινῇ ζώσεται καὶ κίδαριν λινῆν περιθήσεται ἱμάτια ἅγιά ἐστιν καὶ λούσεται ὕδατι πᾶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνδύσεται αὐτά (LXX)
>
>
>
The tunic is removed and left in the Holy Place:
>
> “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. (Leviticus 16:23 ESV)
>
>
>
Therefore Mark and Matthew record the tearing of the Temple veil opening the entrance to the Most Holy Place and John presents Jesus as the High Priest, who is and makes the sacrifice and leaves His tunic outside the Most Holy Place.
---
1. The crown of thorns fulfills this requirement | '**The tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom**'. That's what "*sewn from the top*" means. It's a special type of weaving - something akin to seamless knitting (on circular needles) except through weaving.
Weaving a seamless garment was a special skill, out of the ordinary and exceedingly rare - so quite valuable. This detail implies the garment was specially woven for Yehshua, perhaps even the product of a mother's hand, or possibly a close follower - like Mary Magdalene.
>
> Notice the prophecy in **Psalm 22:18** - ***They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment***.
> This prophesy contains two details:
>
>
> * They divide my clothes among them; and
> * {they} cast lots for my garment.
>
>
> Why divide **AND** cast lots?
>
>
> **ANSWER**: The detail contained in **Matthew 27:3** provides the answer to the riddle of **Psalm 22:18**. The clothes that could be divided were divided, yet one was seamless *sewn from the top* and quite valuable so sought after. Lots were drawn for the tunic because of its value.
>
>
> |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | The clothing of Christ is symbolic of the Christian churches. The doctrine, ritual, liturgy etc. these are the outer coverings of God. They point us toward God. They are distinct from God in some ways yet are owned by Christ. The tunic represents the Holy apostolic church that will remain intact until the end of days. And the torn robe represents the various schisms and resulting denominations which all harbour various truths (yet not wholly intact). And so we can follow the path of truth toward the one true church of which to unite in worship of the risen Christ. We can subjectively and objectively find his tunic intact even today. The casting of lots means that it is God that chooses what truths he gives to what man. It is not man who chooses which truth he takes for himself. which points us back to the garden of eden where conversely it was man who chose the fruit of death. Christ crucified on the cross has become the tree of life.
The temple veil being torn apart from the top signifies an act of God ending the old covenant. Mainly because Christ is the sacrificial lamb that takes on all the sins of the world, so that sacrifices at the temple are no longer needed. | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
27,095 | Matthew, Mark, and John record casting lots to divide Jesus' clothing. John adds the Old Testament quote from Psalm 22:18 and provides other details:
>
> When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments and divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says, “They divided my garments among them,
> and for my clothing they cast lots.” (John 19:23-24)
>
>
>
John records the clothing was divided into four parts and there was one piece of clothing which the soldiers did not want to tear: a tunic seamless which had been woven together "from the top."
"From the top" calls attention to the veil separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place which both Matthew (27:51) and Mark (15:38) record as being torn in two from the top. However, the tearing of the veil is a detail John chose to omit.
Is John intending a comparison of the tunic to the veil? If so what is the importance of the tunic remaining intact in contrast to the Temple veil which had to be torn apart? | 2017/02/20 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/27095",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/8450/"
] | The garment had no seams , representing there is no hole or crack in which to enter Heaven or be saved but only through Jesus Christ and his sacrifice and grace . When Jesus entered the throne to His Father He was given the garment of holiness and praise and we will also . Casting lots or trying to buy your way into salvation or enter through any other way besides the blood of Jesus will not save you ! Only through accepting His sacrifice and cleansing blood can we be saved | Christ came in the fullness of time close to the 4,000 year mark after Adam. The fourth day is when the material universe (cosmos) came to be and light was divided from darkness.
He took on the sin of the world and His garment was symbolically divided into four pieces (for the four corners of the world).
The four gospels are given as witness to what Jesus did. And He will only return when the whole gospel is preached to the whole world.
I believe that’s what the divided four pieces represent. The inner garment that was seamless probably represented His character as others have said but the hidden component, the Living Word, His divine person could not be divided. His body human - broken for the World, His divinity robed within experiencing everything firsthand. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | Putting in place a better system for evaluating teaching than today's student evaluation forms would be a good start. Getting serious about the assessment of student learning outcomes (rather than simply assigning grades) would also be extremely helpful. | You don't hire people who don't take teaching seriously, and if you do happen to hire them accidentally, you deny them tenure and kick them out.
More generally, you reward those who take teaching seriously and/or punish those who don't. This means you give the former time (by reducing the number of classes they have to teach), money (by paying them more, giving them department funds for research, whatever), and/or other perks (nice office, free parking pass, first dibs on teaching the particular classes they'd most like to teach, whatever), and you don't give those things to the latter. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | Putting in place a better system for evaluating teaching than today's student evaluation forms would be a good start. Getting serious about the assessment of student learning outcomes (rather than simply assigning grades) would also be extremely helpful. | The fundamental problem is that research and teaching are two *entirely* different skills. Imagine you're hiring a chef who is also expected to spend a third of his or her time waiting tables; the simple fact of reality is that specially talented individuals will rarely excel at both of these tasks.
You can't *convince* a professor to be a better teacher than they are - most simply do not have the personality type, passion, inclination, or even inherent capacity to be excellent teachers. They haven't trained those skills nor have they required them to get to their current position in life. It isn't what they were hired for, it isn't what they are good at, and it isn't what they have spent their lives wanting and learning to do. Professors are hired to perform and manage research activities and are only incidentally required to also perform *custodial* teaching duties. They would likely also do a terrible job if you required them to pitch in cooking lunch in the cafeteria twice a week.
At least in my part of the world, secondary school teachers are not even allowed to apply for a job without an appropriate degree in education. This is to say that, in addition to having the required qualifications in the subject that they are teaching they are also required to be qualified *teachers*. I see higher education eventually following a similar model - as teaching becomes more important, professorship *must* eventually branch into two or three largely separate streams.
With specialization being so critical in almost every other professional activity it is almost unbelievable that professorship is such a haphazard occupation. While the training and demonstrated excellence for the position is almost entirely based on research and scientific acumen, professors are nevertheless required to also perform at least two entirely different functions - teaching and management. Surely some PhDs would love to only teach while others would love to devote entirely to research. Likewise, how many late-career professors could continue to produce invaluable research if not burdened by the need to both teach and project-manage a large research group; the very skill they excel at is squandered while their time is occupied performing things they are often neither good at nor that they enjoy.
If you want good teachers, hire teachers to teach. If you want good researchers, hire researchers to research. If you want well managed research groups, hire managers to manage them. If you want chaos and headaches, pick some clever boffins and get them to juggle it all at once. Occasionally you will get lucky and find professors who are excellent researchers, excellent teachers, and excellent managers but, in my experience, these are very rare creatures indeed. Higher education would do well to reconsider its organizational hierarchy, I think. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | Putting in place a better system for evaluating teaching than today's student evaluation forms would be a good start. Getting serious about the assessment of student learning outcomes (rather than simply assigning grades) would also be extremely helpful. | **Step 0:** Talk to/with existing faculty. How do they view their teaching skill, it's relative importance, motivation to do better, what do they think would improve their own teaching and/or the teaching of others? I would hope the actual people on the ground know a thing or two more than some random fool on the internet (such as myself).
**Step 0b:** Probably prioritize what people actually think at your institution over what I'll say below. Further, educated people are generally incredibly resistant to having random diktats imposed on them (and professors who are renowned for valuing their positions autonomy all the more so), so you'll need people to buy into things and embrace things. That takes some great implementation skill, diplomacy, and care - good advice followed poorly is rarely a boon. But with that said...
**Step 1:** Clearly, effectively communicate what is valued in the department/institution - to existing faculty, students, prospective faculty, and the world at large.
**Step 2:** Actually value those things - don't just pay them lip-service. Are meaningful teaching awards given? Are special posts/chairs given for teaching excellence, with funding and reduced other-than-teaching workloads optionally reduced? Can a person be a great teacher and a not-so-good researcher and expect to be respected and have job security comparable to a star researcher who can barely teach at all? Research/grants are often tied to equipment, labs, funding for students/assistants/projects - must teaching be solely it's own reward at your institution?
**Step 3:** Measure what's important. Is a respected teaching-quality rating system in place to poll students before/during/after courses, program entrance/graduation, etc? How do you know who is doing a great job and who's doing a bad one? Do people even know if they are doing a good job? Does everyone else know who's doing great things? Is student success/learning solely the responsibility of individual faculty to determine and measure - as though assessment were somehow trivial and easy to do - and thus one class/semester/teacher cannot be meaningfully compared or evaluated? Tight feedback loops are necessary for flow experiences and improvement - tighten the loop.
**Step 4:** Provide mechanisms for improvement. Feedback from students, constructive advice/encouragement/criticism from senior faculty - especially previously identified great teachers, funding for workshops/conferences specifically about education/pedagogy/teaching, bringing in outside faculty/speakers to speak and hold workshops, etc. Teaching is a skill, just like researching - it must be learned. As some people have very little teaching experience (sometimes having won fellowships that exempted them from teaching), it is generally unwise to just cross your fingers and pray people figure it out on their own.
**Step 5:** At the end of a semester/year, appraise the situation. What is going well, and what isn't? Make a plan to do better next year, implement the plan, and follow up again next semester/year. Do it again. And again. And again. There are no real shortcuts, just consistent hard work performed by many, repeatedly, over a stretch of time.
**Step 6:** Align decisions at ever greater (and lesser) levels to match what is truly valued. Student selection, graduate program admittance, postdoc positions, faculty hiring, tenure decisions - if teaching isn't important to the department/institution, it is strange to expect it to be treated as though it were actually important none the less. This doesn't necessarily have to mean everyone must be amazing teachers or else - just that it must be a factor that really does matter and holds value.
**Warning:** *Anything that hints of punishment, job insecurity, lack of respect, or unpleasantness will lead to both intentional and unintentional gaming/sabotage/resistance to any process of improvement or assessment. Trust is valuable, hard to build, and incredibly easy to lose.*
In the end, some people are naturally motivated and take it upon themselves to be better and better teachers. For those people you likely need only give them what they need and don't step on them or get in their way. But social systems are powerful, and can rob people of their desire and motivation just as they can encourage the better angels of our nature and inspire us. It must then be decided what system you have now, and what are you willing to and able to do about it? |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | **Step 0:** Talk to/with existing faculty. How do they view their teaching skill, it's relative importance, motivation to do better, what do they think would improve their own teaching and/or the teaching of others? I would hope the actual people on the ground know a thing or two more than some random fool on the internet (such as myself).
**Step 0b:** Probably prioritize what people actually think at your institution over what I'll say below. Further, educated people are generally incredibly resistant to having random diktats imposed on them (and professors who are renowned for valuing their positions autonomy all the more so), so you'll need people to buy into things and embrace things. That takes some great implementation skill, diplomacy, and care - good advice followed poorly is rarely a boon. But with that said...
**Step 1:** Clearly, effectively communicate what is valued in the department/institution - to existing faculty, students, prospective faculty, and the world at large.
**Step 2:** Actually value those things - don't just pay them lip-service. Are meaningful teaching awards given? Are special posts/chairs given for teaching excellence, with funding and reduced other-than-teaching workloads optionally reduced? Can a person be a great teacher and a not-so-good researcher and expect to be respected and have job security comparable to a star researcher who can barely teach at all? Research/grants are often tied to equipment, labs, funding for students/assistants/projects - must teaching be solely it's own reward at your institution?
**Step 3:** Measure what's important. Is a respected teaching-quality rating system in place to poll students before/during/after courses, program entrance/graduation, etc? How do you know who is doing a great job and who's doing a bad one? Do people even know if they are doing a good job? Does everyone else know who's doing great things? Is student success/learning solely the responsibility of individual faculty to determine and measure - as though assessment were somehow trivial and easy to do - and thus one class/semester/teacher cannot be meaningfully compared or evaluated? Tight feedback loops are necessary for flow experiences and improvement - tighten the loop.
**Step 4:** Provide mechanisms for improvement. Feedback from students, constructive advice/encouragement/criticism from senior faculty - especially previously identified great teachers, funding for workshops/conferences specifically about education/pedagogy/teaching, bringing in outside faculty/speakers to speak and hold workshops, etc. Teaching is a skill, just like researching - it must be learned. As some people have very little teaching experience (sometimes having won fellowships that exempted them from teaching), it is generally unwise to just cross your fingers and pray people figure it out on their own.
**Step 5:** At the end of a semester/year, appraise the situation. What is going well, and what isn't? Make a plan to do better next year, implement the plan, and follow up again next semester/year. Do it again. And again. And again. There are no real shortcuts, just consistent hard work performed by many, repeatedly, over a stretch of time.
**Step 6:** Align decisions at ever greater (and lesser) levels to match what is truly valued. Student selection, graduate program admittance, postdoc positions, faculty hiring, tenure decisions - if teaching isn't important to the department/institution, it is strange to expect it to be treated as though it were actually important none the less. This doesn't necessarily have to mean everyone must be amazing teachers or else - just that it must be a factor that really does matter and holds value.
**Warning:** *Anything that hints of punishment, job insecurity, lack of respect, or unpleasantness will lead to both intentional and unintentional gaming/sabotage/resistance to any process of improvement or assessment. Trust is valuable, hard to build, and incredibly easy to lose.*
In the end, some people are naturally motivated and take it upon themselves to be better and better teachers. For those people you likely need only give them what they need and don't step on them or get in their way. But social systems are powerful, and can rob people of their desire and motivation just as they can encourage the better angels of our nature and inspire us. It must then be decided what system you have now, and what are you willing to and able to do about it? | Much mention has been made of Reward for good teaching, but I would like to suggest an old fashioned and out-of-date idea: Punishment. If someone fails to deliver on their contracted responsibilities to the agreed quality and standards, then they need to face the consequences of their actions and decisions, resulting if necessary in formal disciplinary proceedings. It is not like their students are going to get another chance, so why should the teachers?
However, this means taking responsibility for setting those standards and auditing progress to ensure that they are met, which is something most facilities seem reluctant to do. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | Putting in place a better system for evaluating teaching than today's student evaluation forms would be a good start. Getting serious about the assessment of student learning outcomes (rather than simply assigning grades) would also be extremely helpful. | Much mention has been made of Reward for good teaching, but I would like to suggest an old fashioned and out-of-date idea: Punishment. If someone fails to deliver on their contracted responsibilities to the agreed quality and standards, then they need to face the consequences of their actions and decisions, resulting if necessary in formal disciplinary proceedings. It is not like their students are going to get another chance, so why should the teachers?
However, this means taking responsibility for setting those standards and auditing progress to ensure that they are met, which is something most facilities seem reluctant to do. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | The fundamental problem is that research and teaching are two *entirely* different skills. Imagine you're hiring a chef who is also expected to spend a third of his or her time waiting tables; the simple fact of reality is that specially talented individuals will rarely excel at both of these tasks.
You can't *convince* a professor to be a better teacher than they are - most simply do not have the personality type, passion, inclination, or even inherent capacity to be excellent teachers. They haven't trained those skills nor have they required them to get to their current position in life. It isn't what they were hired for, it isn't what they are good at, and it isn't what they have spent their lives wanting and learning to do. Professors are hired to perform and manage research activities and are only incidentally required to also perform *custodial* teaching duties. They would likely also do a terrible job if you required them to pitch in cooking lunch in the cafeteria twice a week.
At least in my part of the world, secondary school teachers are not even allowed to apply for a job without an appropriate degree in education. This is to say that, in addition to having the required qualifications in the subject that they are teaching they are also required to be qualified *teachers*. I see higher education eventually following a similar model - as teaching becomes more important, professorship *must* eventually branch into two or three largely separate streams.
With specialization being so critical in almost every other professional activity it is almost unbelievable that professorship is such a haphazard occupation. While the training and demonstrated excellence for the position is almost entirely based on research and scientific acumen, professors are nevertheless required to also perform at least two entirely different functions - teaching and management. Surely some PhDs would love to only teach while others would love to devote entirely to research. Likewise, how many late-career professors could continue to produce invaluable research if not burdened by the need to both teach and project-manage a large research group; the very skill they excel at is squandered while their time is occupied performing things they are often neither good at nor that they enjoy.
If you want good teachers, hire teachers to teach. If you want good researchers, hire researchers to research. If you want well managed research groups, hire managers to manage them. If you want chaos and headaches, pick some clever boffins and get them to juggle it all at once. Occasionally you will get lucky and find professors who are excellent researchers, excellent teachers, and excellent managers but, in my experience, these are very rare creatures indeed. Higher education would do well to reconsider its organizational hierarchy, I think. | Much mention has been made of Reward for good teaching, but I would like to suggest an old fashioned and out-of-date idea: Punishment. If someone fails to deliver on their contracted responsibilities to the agreed quality and standards, then they need to face the consequences of their actions and decisions, resulting if necessary in formal disciplinary proceedings. It is not like their students are going to get another chance, so why should the teachers?
However, this means taking responsibility for setting those standards and auditing progress to ensure that they are met, which is something most facilities seem reluctant to do. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | The fundamental problem is that research and teaching are two *entirely* different skills. Imagine you're hiring a chef who is also expected to spend a third of his or her time waiting tables; the simple fact of reality is that specially talented individuals will rarely excel at both of these tasks.
You can't *convince* a professor to be a better teacher than they are - most simply do not have the personality type, passion, inclination, or even inherent capacity to be excellent teachers. They haven't trained those skills nor have they required them to get to their current position in life. It isn't what they were hired for, it isn't what they are good at, and it isn't what they have spent their lives wanting and learning to do. Professors are hired to perform and manage research activities and are only incidentally required to also perform *custodial* teaching duties. They would likely also do a terrible job if you required them to pitch in cooking lunch in the cafeteria twice a week.
At least in my part of the world, secondary school teachers are not even allowed to apply for a job without an appropriate degree in education. This is to say that, in addition to having the required qualifications in the subject that they are teaching they are also required to be qualified *teachers*. I see higher education eventually following a similar model - as teaching becomes more important, professorship *must* eventually branch into two or three largely separate streams.
With specialization being so critical in almost every other professional activity it is almost unbelievable that professorship is such a haphazard occupation. While the training and demonstrated excellence for the position is almost entirely based on research and scientific acumen, professors are nevertheless required to also perform at least two entirely different functions - teaching and management. Surely some PhDs would love to only teach while others would love to devote entirely to research. Likewise, how many late-career professors could continue to produce invaluable research if not burdened by the need to both teach and project-manage a large research group; the very skill they excel at is squandered while their time is occupied performing things they are often neither good at nor that they enjoy.
If you want good teachers, hire teachers to teach. If you want good researchers, hire researchers to research. If you want well managed research groups, hire managers to manage them. If you want chaos and headaches, pick some clever boffins and get them to juggle it all at once. Occasionally you will get lucky and find professors who are excellent researchers, excellent teachers, and excellent managers but, in my experience, these are very rare creatures indeed. Higher education would do well to reconsider its organizational hierarchy, I think. | In a nutshell: **Competition** between departments
for students and funding
can be one of the important reasons
to cause departments to care about the quality of teaching.
I give the following anecdote to illustrate the above principle.
In my undergrad institution,
which is outside the US and is fairly large (~30 K undergrads),
the introductory math classes taken by engineering students
were taught by professors in the math department.
I had heard from people in the math department that
some in the engineering department
wanted to teach the classes themselves,
so as to gain more funding and be able to hire more headcount (faculty).
Because the math department did not want to
lose this funding and headcount to the engineering department
they sent their best teaching professors to teach the intro math courses.
This allowed the math department to defend their position and say,
"We're doing a good job teaching this course,
as evidenced by good teaching evaluations,
so why should you rock the boat?" |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | Putting in place a better system for evaluating teaching than today's student evaluation forms would be a good start. Getting serious about the assessment of student learning outcomes (rather than simply assigning grades) would also be extremely helpful. | In a nutshell: **Competition** between departments
for students and funding
can be one of the important reasons
to cause departments to care about the quality of teaching.
I give the following anecdote to illustrate the above principle.
In my undergrad institution,
which is outside the US and is fairly large (~30 K undergrads),
the introductory math classes taken by engineering students
were taught by professors in the math department.
I had heard from people in the math department that
some in the engineering department
wanted to teach the classes themselves,
so as to gain more funding and be able to hire more headcount (faculty).
Because the math department did not want to
lose this funding and headcount to the engineering department
they sent their best teaching professors to teach the intro math courses.
This allowed the math department to defend their position and say,
"We're doing a good job teaching this course,
as evidenced by good teaching evaluations,
so why should you rock the boat?" |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | You don't hire people who don't take teaching seriously, and if you do happen to hire them accidentally, you deny them tenure and kick them out.
More generally, you reward those who take teaching seriously and/or punish those who don't. This means you give the former time (by reducing the number of classes they have to teach), money (by paying them more, giving them department funds for research, whatever), and/or other perks (nice office, free parking pass, first dibs on teaching the particular classes they'd most like to teach, whatever), and you don't give those things to the latter. | Much mention has been made of Reward for good teaching, but I would like to suggest an old fashioned and out-of-date idea: Punishment. If someone fails to deliver on their contracted responsibilities to the agreed quality and standards, then they need to face the consequences of their actions and decisions, resulting if necessary in formal disciplinary proceedings. It is not like their students are going to get another chance, so why should the teachers?
However, this means taking responsibility for setting those standards and auditing progress to ensure that they are met, which is something most facilities seem reluctant to do. |
35,306 | **tl;dr**
Faculty don't think teaching is as important as their other responsibilities; how do we change that?
**Long version**
I've been working in academia for a long time and whenever I see instructors half-assing their teaching the go to excuses are that they have no time, or that it doesn't get any respect/grants/promotion/tenure/etc. I don't doubt they're busy, and I know departments don't typically reward teaching excellence (or punish teaching mediocrity...) but the students are suffering as a result.
How can we (faculty that care about teaching and staff supporting faculty) change this situation? What can we do short-term to make faculty care about teaching *now* and what can we do long-term to make departments care about excellence in teaching, and not just in research?
*Note:* I'm aware research brings in money. Keep in mind most faculty are adjuncts who aren't doing research but still have tenured research faculty that don't care about teaching as their role models. | 2015/01/06 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27290/"
] | In a nutshell: **Competition** between departments
for students and funding
can be one of the important reasons
to cause departments to care about the quality of teaching.
I give the following anecdote to illustrate the above principle.
In my undergrad institution,
which is outside the US and is fairly large (~30 K undergrads),
the introductory math classes taken by engineering students
were taught by professors in the math department.
I had heard from people in the math department that
some in the engineering department
wanted to teach the classes themselves,
so as to gain more funding and be able to hire more headcount (faculty).
Because the math department did not want to
lose this funding and headcount to the engineering department
they sent their best teaching professors to teach the intro math courses.
This allowed the math department to defend their position and say,
"We're doing a good job teaching this course,
as evidenced by good teaching evaluations,
so why should you rock the boat?" | Much mention has been made of Reward for good teaching, but I would like to suggest an old fashioned and out-of-date idea: Punishment. If someone fails to deliver on their contracted responsibilities to the agreed quality and standards, then they need to face the consequences of their actions and decisions, resulting if necessary in formal disciplinary proceedings. It is not like their students are going to get another chance, so why should the teachers?
However, this means taking responsibility for setting those standards and auditing progress to ensure that they are met, which is something most facilities seem reluctant to do. |
11,944,542 | I want to know whether Perl is installed by default on all Unix-based operating systems. Since I want to write server-side programs, I need to choose between Perl and C. | 2012/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11944542",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1595858/"
] | I'm not sure whether Perl is standard on all Unix server installs. I'm not even sure what that means - a server is a piece of hardware, it doesn't have to come with *any* specific software (not even an OS).
I don't think this should be the deciding factor anyway. You can always compile Perl, or distribute Perl with your program. The factors in choosing a language for your project are:
1) Which languages map well to the domain? Using C for a text processing program would be a mistake, this is where Perl and Python shine (perhaps Ruby also?). Using Perl for your hard real time embedded application would probably be a mistake.
2) What experience do the people on the team have?
3) What skills would you (or your company) like to develop? It might be okay to use a new language if this is something that will give you or your company an edge in the long run. The best example of this would be Ericsson switching to Erlang. | Most linux distros DO include it by default. However, we got a stack of AIX machines a few months back running AIX 7.1 and none of them have perl installed.
The very, very broad answer is no, you cannot assume that every Linux or Unix system you buy will have Perl installed on it. |
37,906 | I viscerally hate low calorie sugar replacements - all of them, including Splenda (sucralose), except in one application. In my iced coffee I like sugar-free hazelnut syrup. The brand that I've been using is sweetened with Splenda (and sneakily, acesulfame potassium). It would be great except that it's very expensive. I spend $70/month just for that syrup. I have 50 grams of sucralose (that's enough to sweeten my coffee for years) which is the sweetener in Splenda. I also have hazelnut extract. I've made a "syrup" with water, sucralose and hazelnut extract and it turned out OK, but the coffee drink really lacks something without the syrupy quality of the commercial stuff.
The ingredients on the label for the commercial syrup: Purified water, natural and artificial flavors, citric acid, acesulfame potassium, sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate (to preserve freshness), xanthan gum, sucralose (SPLENDA Brand), caramel color.
I know that acesulfame potassium is a sweetener, Splenda generally contains maltodextrin and sucralose, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. There doesn't seem to be any maltodextrin in the product. Unless I'm missing something, that means that the commercial product gets its viscosity from an infinitesimal amount of xanthan gum. Could that be right?
Of course I can get xanthan gum. Say I'm making 2 cups of syrup at a time, I add 1/8 tsp sucralose and two teaspoons of extract to 2 cups of boiling water (off heat). Now what? | 2013/10/26 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/37906",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20183/"
] | I don't have a good suggestion for what to use, but at least I can give you some info on xanthan.
Yes, syrup can take viscosity from an infinitesmal amount of xanthan gum. If you add 0.5% to 1% of the fluid's weight in xanthan, you get a pudding consistency. For a syrup-like viscosity, you need much less.
But xanthan is not a sugar, and does not make a syrupy consistency. It makes stuff gooey, not sticky. This may be enough for you, if all you need is some thickness, but the texture won't be the same as normal sugar syrup. I haven't tried commercial sugar-free syrup, so I can't make a comparison there.
Xanthan has also the unfortunate tendency to reduce aroma, although it may not be a problem in the little amounts needed for syrup-like thickness. | Make it with xylitol as you would with sugar: 1 cup xylitol, 1/2 cup of water. I use tapioca starch to thicken it; the amount of tapioca depends on the quality. |
212,823 | Do we use cache memory in microcontrollers, if not, why not? If yes, what is its application in embedded systems or it is enough just to have RAM? | 2016/01/22 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/212823",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/81163/"
] | Cache memory adds a level of latency unpredictability that may be unwanted. A lot (most?) of microcontrollers are used in a realtime setting where you have to budget for worst-case timing. It does not matter if your code is fast *on average*, if there is a chance that it won't meet the deadline in *worst case*. Worst case would be that your code or data is not in the cache, and since you have to budget for it anyway, the cache just adds extra cost and complexity.
Some microcontrollers I have worked with has a small embedded SRAM that can be used as a "manual cache". You put stuff there that must have a low latency, be it code or data.
Now, the term "microcontroller" is becoming more and more bloated. Is the 8-core ARM processor in your phone a microcontroller? If so, then yes, of course it should have a cache. | Having a level 1 cache is a trade-off between speed and cost. For speed, the bigger you make memory, the the longer the path to the data gets. That means that it'll take longer and longer (in terms of latency) the more memory you add. At some point performance degrades due this latency, which is the point when adding a level 1 cache makes sense. Cost is also a consideration, in that high-speed memory is more expensive than other types of memory. Finally, an additional benefit is that caches can make the micro-controller oblivious to the *kind* of memory it is read from.
Micro-controllers have typically had small memories, and therefore they often have no level 1 cache. In a sense their whole memory could be considered a level 1 cache! However, many micro-controllers today are very capable and start crossing over into the micro-processor territory, with bigger memories and therefore also level-1 (and level-2) caches.
Having caches adds a rather significant toll on the programming side, since real-time behavior on cache-misses can be hard to predict. Sometimes, this doesn't matter and/or can be worked around, but in the cases where it does there are a few options:
* Use smaller micro controllers for specific sub-tasks in a larger system.
* Use a chip that has embedded physical real-time units.
The first solution is quite attractive, as micro-controllers are cheap and capable. However, communication between the controllers and the main (CPU) unit could become an issue. This is why chips with embedded real-time capabilities can be a better solution.
As with all engineering, there are pros and cons for every solution. Pick the right tool for the job! |
212,823 | Do we use cache memory in microcontrollers, if not, why not? If yes, what is its application in embedded systems or it is enough just to have RAM? | 2016/01/22 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/212823",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/81163/"
] | Cache memory adds a level of latency unpredictability that may be unwanted. A lot (most?) of microcontrollers are used in a realtime setting where you have to budget for worst-case timing. It does not matter if your code is fast *on average*, if there is a chance that it won't meet the deadline in *worst case*. Worst case would be that your code or data is not in the cache, and since you have to budget for it anyway, the cache just adds extra cost and complexity.
Some microcontrollers I have worked with has a small embedded SRAM that can be used as a "manual cache". You put stuff there that must have a low latency, be it code or data.
Now, the term "microcontroller" is becoming more and more bloated. Is the 8-core ARM processor in your phone a microcontroller? If so, then yes, of course it should have a cache. | Above a certain speed, fast memory costs more per byte than slow memory (below that speed, making memory slower won't make it any cheaper). If a system has a large amount of memory, having most of it be slow but then including a cache of fast memory and the logic to run it will be cheaper than making all of the memory fast. If the system doesn't run very fast, however, memory which can keep up with the system won't cost more than slower memory, so there's no reason not to have all the memory be fast enough to keep up with the system. If the system is fast but doesn't have much memory, the cost savings from making the bulk of the memory slow won't be sufficient to justify the cost of adding a cache.
Many microcontrollers have a flash interface which can fetch multiple bytes at once into a buffer; while this might be viewed as a sort of cache, in many cases it won't be an addressable memory, since each bit of the buffer will only be able to take data from a single source [a bit line from the flash array]. |
212,823 | Do we use cache memory in microcontrollers, if not, why not? If yes, what is its application in embedded systems or it is enough just to have RAM? | 2016/01/22 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/212823",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/81163/"
] | Above a certain speed, fast memory costs more per byte than slow memory (below that speed, making memory slower won't make it any cheaper). If a system has a large amount of memory, having most of it be slow but then including a cache of fast memory and the logic to run it will be cheaper than making all of the memory fast. If the system doesn't run very fast, however, memory which can keep up with the system won't cost more than slower memory, so there's no reason not to have all the memory be fast enough to keep up with the system. If the system is fast but doesn't have much memory, the cost savings from making the bulk of the memory slow won't be sufficient to justify the cost of adding a cache.
Many microcontrollers have a flash interface which can fetch multiple bytes at once into a buffer; while this might be viewed as a sort of cache, in many cases it won't be an addressable memory, since each bit of the buffer will only be able to take data from a single source [a bit line from the flash array]. | Having a level 1 cache is a trade-off between speed and cost. For speed, the bigger you make memory, the the longer the path to the data gets. That means that it'll take longer and longer (in terms of latency) the more memory you add. At some point performance degrades due this latency, which is the point when adding a level 1 cache makes sense. Cost is also a consideration, in that high-speed memory is more expensive than other types of memory. Finally, an additional benefit is that caches can make the micro-controller oblivious to the *kind* of memory it is read from.
Micro-controllers have typically had small memories, and therefore they often have no level 1 cache. In a sense their whole memory could be considered a level 1 cache! However, many micro-controllers today are very capable and start crossing over into the micro-processor territory, with bigger memories and therefore also level-1 (and level-2) caches.
Having caches adds a rather significant toll on the programming side, since real-time behavior on cache-misses can be hard to predict. Sometimes, this doesn't matter and/or can be worked around, but in the cases where it does there are a few options:
* Use smaller micro controllers for specific sub-tasks in a larger system.
* Use a chip that has embedded physical real-time units.
The first solution is quite attractive, as micro-controllers are cheap and capable. However, communication between the controllers and the main (CPU) unit could become an issue. This is why chips with embedded real-time capabilities can be a better solution.
As with all engineering, there are pros and cons for every solution. Pick the right tool for the job! |
178,546 | So far any search for Pogoplug security risk does not bring up anything alarming. Just wondering if anyone else has run across any mention of security issues with this device. | 2010/08/21 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/178546",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/46807/"
] | Let's go down the stack and look at every aspect of its security.
* **Remote Computer**: very easily compromised on an untrustworthy computer via a keylogger, so if you either a) only access your Pogoplug from your (trustworthy) computers, b) change your password often (i.e., at least once every 6 weeks), or c) use the very awesome [Keepass](http://keepass.info) 2.x that has a feature that scrambles then descrambles the password through simulated keystrokes, the clipboard and the arrow keys.
* **Remote Computer's Internet-Your Pogoplug**: not as easily compromised because Pogoplug (if the reviews are correct) operates entirely under Secure Sockets (SSL), meaning any data between the remote computer and the pogoplug is encrypted with encryptions algorithms that only quantum computers can crack before the universe explodes.
* **The Pogoplug**: There aren't any insomnia-worthy viruses or threats out there, since it runs ARM (only common in phones) and Linux. Unless somebody launches a DDoS attack on it (which, assuming your son isn't Osama bin Laden or targeted by 4chan) means that nobody will a) be able to get into it without the codes, or b) care.
* **Your Son and His Friends**: This is the most important part because most modern schemes involve exploiting human psychology and inability to think reasonably when in immense stress. The worst thing that can feasibly happen is that your son accidentally changes the Pogoplug's privacy settings without knowing or forgetting to log out of a borrowed or public computer.
**In Summary**: The Pogoplug itself isn't a security problem, the people who use it are. And for the same reason phishing schemes are so widespread nowadays.
**Edit**: I should mention that when I was analyzing the security weakpoints, I was assuming that there's some superpowerful group of people after your son (e.g. the NSA, Al Qaeda). Otherwise the chances of people even trying the worst-case attacks I show here are nigh unlikely. | Nope!
I have been hearing a lot about this device recently in the trade press and I haven't seen anything about security.
That being said, no one can say any product is 100% secure, and the company does appear to be around for the long term, so I am sure they will patch any problems. |
178,546 | So far any search for Pogoplug security risk does not bring up anything alarming. Just wondering if anyone else has run across any mention of security issues with this device. | 2010/08/21 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/178546",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/46807/"
] | The pogoplug essentially makes a connection to the manufacturer's server and provides content through it, at least in part. In my book that is a security concern, but for most people it is no more a threat than posting your pictures on facebook and only letting your friends see them is.
You're trusting the manufacturer to actively protect your data though, rather than passively protect it by designing a good password authentication scheme (for example).
This is based on what I've read about pogoplug which is very little recently, and a bit more, but a lot longer ago. | Nope!
I have been hearing a lot about this device recently in the trade press and I haven't seen anything about security.
That being said, no one can say any product is 100% secure, and the company does appear to be around for the long term, so I am sure they will patch any problems. |
178,546 | So far any search for Pogoplug security risk does not bring up anything alarming. Just wondering if anyone else has run across any mention of security issues with this device. | 2010/08/21 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/178546",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/46807/"
] | Let's go down the stack and look at every aspect of its security.
* **Remote Computer**: very easily compromised on an untrustworthy computer via a keylogger, so if you either a) only access your Pogoplug from your (trustworthy) computers, b) change your password often (i.e., at least once every 6 weeks), or c) use the very awesome [Keepass](http://keepass.info) 2.x that has a feature that scrambles then descrambles the password through simulated keystrokes, the clipboard and the arrow keys.
* **Remote Computer's Internet-Your Pogoplug**: not as easily compromised because Pogoplug (if the reviews are correct) operates entirely under Secure Sockets (SSL), meaning any data between the remote computer and the pogoplug is encrypted with encryptions algorithms that only quantum computers can crack before the universe explodes.
* **The Pogoplug**: There aren't any insomnia-worthy viruses or threats out there, since it runs ARM (only common in phones) and Linux. Unless somebody launches a DDoS attack on it (which, assuming your son isn't Osama bin Laden or targeted by 4chan) means that nobody will a) be able to get into it without the codes, or b) care.
* **Your Son and His Friends**: This is the most important part because most modern schemes involve exploiting human psychology and inability to think reasonably when in immense stress. The worst thing that can feasibly happen is that your son accidentally changes the Pogoplug's privacy settings without knowing or forgetting to log out of a borrowed or public computer.
**In Summary**: The Pogoplug itself isn't a security problem, the people who use it are. And for the same reason phishing schemes are so widespread nowadays.
**Edit**: I should mention that when I was analyzing the security weakpoints, I was assuming that there's some superpowerful group of people after your son (e.g. the NSA, Al Qaeda). Otherwise the chances of people even trying the worst-case attacks I show here are nigh unlikely. | It's basically a linux server with a custom web interface, so whatever vulnerabilities exist with linux in general are also shared by the pogoplug, as well as the specific installed applications, which I don't know because I don't have one. More of a risk is not changing default passwords, and the general privacy issues with having something that's designed for sharing files. |
178,546 | So far any search for Pogoplug security risk does not bring up anything alarming. Just wondering if anyone else has run across any mention of security issues with this device. | 2010/08/21 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/178546",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/46807/"
] | The pogoplug essentially makes a connection to the manufacturer's server and provides content through it, at least in part. In my book that is a security concern, but for most people it is no more a threat than posting your pictures on facebook and only letting your friends see them is.
You're trusting the manufacturer to actively protect your data though, rather than passively protect it by designing a good password authentication scheme (for example).
This is based on what I've read about pogoplug which is very little recently, and a bit more, but a lot longer ago. | It's basically a linux server with a custom web interface, so whatever vulnerabilities exist with linux in general are also shared by the pogoplug, as well as the specific installed applications, which I don't know because I don't have one. More of a risk is not changing default passwords, and the general privacy issues with having something that's designed for sharing files. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.