A friend of mine got a job with Microsoft right out of doing a comp sci degree in a good university in around Boston.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6685
All degrees are easy. I did a foundation degree alongside my flight training. Suck it.
Last edited by PrivateVendetta (2011-11-14 16:14:22)
lol foundation degree. congratulations, have a lollipop.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
What is a foundation degree? Like leisure studies? I didn't know universities still did that...
EDIT- looked it up. 2 year degree with less value than an undergraduate.
EDIT- looked it up. 2 year degree with less value than an undergraduate.
Last edited by Pochsy (2011-11-14 16:42:42)
The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families
I've got a friend doing one, the only point of them seems to be they're easier to get onto then you can do a top up year or two and turn them into a shitty undergraduate degree.
He's doing music and the uni that accredits it wont award a full music degree even with the top up, you get some media communication thing.
They're a waste of time.
He's doing music and the uni that accredits it wont award a full music degree even with the top up, you get some media communication thing.
They're a waste of time.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
they're shitty half-degrees in shitty subjects awarded by half-institutions for dumbasses. some people can turn them into 'full' undergraduate degrees by a sorta stepping-up program but it's pretty much pointless because you can only step-up to other crappy degrees at crappy colleges. they're not even comparable to a basic undergraduate degree, and there are a lot of pretty shitty and relaxed universities offering those here (the equivalent of an anyone-can-come community college in the US). a degree itself isn't really hard to get, per se, it's all about context: where, what in, to what standard, to what effect, etc. i dunno what someone would do with a foundation degree. hairdressing, maybe.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
has it struck you that this is what they actually want to be doing?presidentsheep wrote:
1/3rd of Physics graduates at my uni go onto further research (shit pay)
1/3rd go to research (again, shit)
1/3rd go to law/banking and finance/usual city shit. (good pay)
Dunno where the idea that the sciences pay well comes from. Engineering sure, natural sciences no.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
It's the UEA that offers the top up year, not a bad uni. It's done by one of their shitty departments though, media or something, not the actual music department. The foundation is done at a local college though. Really don't see the point of doing a foundation degree in an academic subject.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
Yeah, it's pretty obvious. I want to go into research myself. I'm just saying people tend to do physics more out of personal interest than the high pay that some wrongly believe you get.Spark wrote:
has it struck you that this is what they actually want to be doing?presidentsheep wrote:
1/3rd of Physics graduates at my uni go onto further research (shit pay)
1/3rd go to research (again, shit)
1/3rd go to law/banking and finance/usual city shit. (good pay)
Dunno where the idea that the sciences pay well comes from. Engineering sure, natural sciences no.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
exactly what i said to galt. people at good top uk universities do their respective subjects because it's their talent/main interest, which is as much the same as saying they're "taking the path of least resistance". academic universities take on students that have a passion for their subject, people who are perhaps less career minded and more simply interested in education for knowledge's sake alone (this is highly commendable, imo). galt seems to think that english majors take their subject because it's easy. i don't agree, on both counts. you could just as easily accuse the physics undergrad of taking his BSc and MSc over 3/4 years because it is the easiest option for him, and because the work is naturally easier to him than any other form of work. i don't buy it. people just pursue their academic interests here, not caring so much about the financial return at the end of it. that's not the point of university, in my view, as i keep repeatedly saying.presidentsheep wrote:
Yeah, it's pretty obvious. I want to go into research myself. I'm just saying people tend to do physics more out of personal interest than the high pay that some wrongly believe you get.Spark wrote:
has it struck you that this is what they actually want to be doing?presidentsheep wrote:
1/3rd of Physics graduates at my uni go onto further research (shit pay)
1/3rd go to research (again, shit)
1/3rd go to law/banking and finance/usual city shit. (good pay)
Dunno where the idea that the sciences pay well comes from. Engineering sure, natural sciences no.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Foundation degrees are like you're too shitty to get into our uni, so we put you on "foundation" courses and if you do well you can get in.Pochsy wrote:
What is a foundation degree? Like leisure studies? I didn't know universities still did that...
EDIT- looked it up. 2 year degree with less value than an undergraduate.
http://www.ufs.unsw.edu.au/
http://www.ufs.unsw.edu.au/entry-requirements.htmlUNSW Foundation Studies is the longest-running and leading Foundation Program in Australia and is designed specifically for students with an international education background.
Successful international students have a guaranteed place via a provisional offer to an undergraduate degree at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney. UNSW Foundation Studies graduates can also apply to all other Australian and New Zealand universities, as well as other universities around the world.
Funny how if you get an SAT over 1610 you get an ATAR of 82 (arts min requirement), but if you get only a 3.0 in high school you can't get into legit UNSW
3.0's a B average. Should be easily manageable unless you sat around picking your nose until it was too late to budge them. 1610 is also just slightly above average.
I've not said that, simply that - based on the figures and not your personal circle - the mouth-breathing geeks you so enjoy sneering at will on the average be going into professional jobs and better careers than you and your fellows. Then again I doubt you set foot in Imperial so you're mouthing off about things you know nothing about - again.Uzique wrote:
at the end of the day this is dilbert's same old tired schtick about 'my choices in life were ultimately the best, all other disciplines and approaches are bullshit and will never merit as much happiness and wealth as i have found'
How is that different from what you do, ie put down people less fortunate than yourself and crow about the arts degree your daddy paid for from a second tier college?the typical galt strategy of 'big up what i have done so i can feel better and feel less inferior'
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I did say it was easy.Uzique wrote:
lol foundation degree. congratulations, have a lollipop.
dilbert, i know a few people at imperial and have used ULU libraries and unions. maybe not an imperial seminar room, no, but what difference does that make? from the amount of shit you spout here about "lol literature" - can i ask you if you've ever sat in an undergraduate level lecture for the subject? guess there's not much point in you making comments either, then.
also: my university fees and funding is entirely my sole responsibility. my loans, my debts. thanks.
and rhul is decidedly top tier for my subject (ranked higher than ucl, which is third in the world if you go to the right websites), and is generally top-tier when it comes to academic research, too. it is consistently ranked higher than half of the russell group institutions, which i'm guessing from your veritable wealth of 'newspaper league table rankings' (since you surely aren't on the pulse of research assessments or current academic reputation) are the universities you deem to be 'highest' tier, because the times doth decree it so (based on 'student satisfaction' as much as anything, no less). anyway, i don't see how a university nearing the top20 in europe and in the world's top100 is not 'top tier'. for all intensive purposes in academia any institution in the russell or 1994 groups are worth their serious salt. rhul is one of the top institutions in the 1994 group, so again i'm not sure where the science grad from the 70's is getting his divine authority from about an english department. but, you can think what you like, really, doesn't do any harm to me.
and in reply to your asinine and frankly puerile karma... same comment to you as at jay. when you can write essays judged as being first-class by oxbridge dons, then yeah, alright, i'll let you pass off the "arts and humanities subjects are easy, lol" crap. from what i can see, neither of you have any real intellectual weight when it comes to philosophy or theory/criticism. which is fine, as i've said. but i don't know why you think you're on some high-horse when it comes to intelligence. we've devoted ourselves to completely different fields. it's funny because 2 sane and half-intelligent adults in the outside world would never have this "my area of degree study was far more worthy and difficult than yours" discussion. instead you're both on an internet forum talking to people half your age throwing out the same childish "mine is better than yours!" argument. i've never tried to make any spurious comment about the sciences being a lesser pursuit than the humanities, but for some reason (i'm guessing a major chip on your shoulder- for jay the hatred of anything perceived as comfy middle-class 'leisure' class reading, and for you some traumatic experience at the whip of an uninspiring english teacher that forcefed you dickens. how tragic) you two think you are eminently qualified to be able to do that.
a sad, pathetic little man. you haunt a teenage gaming forum, refuse to ever post a picture of yourself, and constantly wade into discussions with a smarmy tone throwing off the same tired anti-neocon anti-america anti-israel thing, as if it's the last desperate vestiges of your critical faculties. well done dilbs. you're clearly enjoying your well-earned affluent middle-age. haha. sorry for typing so much i only get one post to say what i want to say so they're extra precious to me!!!
also: my university fees and funding is entirely my sole responsibility. my loans, my debts. thanks.
and rhul is decidedly top tier for my subject (ranked higher than ucl, which is third in the world if you go to the right websites), and is generally top-tier when it comes to academic research, too. it is consistently ranked higher than half of the russell group institutions, which i'm guessing from your veritable wealth of 'newspaper league table rankings' (since you surely aren't on the pulse of research assessments or current academic reputation) are the universities you deem to be 'highest' tier, because the times doth decree it so (based on 'student satisfaction' as much as anything, no less). anyway, i don't see how a university nearing the top20 in europe and in the world's top100 is not 'top tier'. for all intensive purposes in academia any institution in the russell or 1994 groups are worth their serious salt. rhul is one of the top institutions in the 1994 group, so again i'm not sure where the science grad from the 70's is getting his divine authority from about an english department. but, you can think what you like, really, doesn't do any harm to me.
and in reply to your asinine and frankly puerile karma... same comment to you as at jay. when you can write essays judged as being first-class by oxbridge dons, then yeah, alright, i'll let you pass off the "arts and humanities subjects are easy, lol" crap. from what i can see, neither of you have any real intellectual weight when it comes to philosophy or theory/criticism. which is fine, as i've said. but i don't know why you think you're on some high-horse when it comes to intelligence. we've devoted ourselves to completely different fields. it's funny because 2 sane and half-intelligent adults in the outside world would never have this "my area of degree study was far more worthy and difficult than yours" discussion. instead you're both on an internet forum talking to people half your age throwing out the same childish "mine is better than yours!" argument. i've never tried to make any spurious comment about the sciences being a lesser pursuit than the humanities, but for some reason (i'm guessing a major chip on your shoulder- for jay the hatred of anything perceived as comfy middle-class 'leisure' class reading, and for you some traumatic experience at the whip of an uninspiring english teacher that forcefed you dickens. how tragic) you two think you are eminently qualified to be able to do that.
a sad, pathetic little man. you haunt a teenage gaming forum, refuse to ever post a picture of yourself, and constantly wade into discussions with a smarmy tone throwing off the same tired anti-neocon anti-america anti-israel thing, as if it's the last desperate vestiges of your critical faculties. well done dilbs. you're clearly enjoying your well-earned affluent middle-age. haha. sorry for typing so much i only get one post to say what i want to say so they're extra precious to me!!!
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Funny thing about UNSW, they never look at transcripts just SAT and Diploma. So you can technically pull a 1.0 avg in high school and score high enough on the SAT to get in XDunnamednewbie13 wrote:
3.0's a B average. Should be easily manageable unless you sat around picking your nose until it was too late to budge them. 1610 is also just slightly above average.
Uzique wrote:
dilbert, i know a few people at imperial and have used ULU libraries and unions. maybe not an imperial seminar room, no, but what difference does that make? from the amount of shit you spout here about "lol literature" - can i ask you if you've ever sat in an undergraduate level lecture for the subject? guess there's not much point in you making comments either, then.
also: my university fees and funding is entirely my sole responsibility. my loans, my debts. thanks.
and rhul is decidedly top tier for my subject (ranked higher than ucl, which is third in the world if you go to the right websites), and is generally top-tier when it comes to academic research, too. it is consistently ranked higher than half of the russell group institutions, which i'm guessing from your veritable wealth of 'newspaper league table rankings' (since you surely aren't on the pulse of research assessments or current academic reputation) are the universities you deem to be 'highest' tier, because the times doth decree it so (based on 'student satisfaction' as much as anything, no less). anyway, i don't see how a university nearing the top20 in europe and in the world's top100 is not 'top tier'. for all intensive purposes in academia any institution in the russell or 1994 groups are worth their serious salt. rhul is one of the top institutions in the 1994 group, so again i'm not sure where the science grad from the 70's is getting his divine authority from about an english department. but, you can think what you like, really, doesn't do any harm to me.
and in reply to your asinine and frankly puerile karma... same comment to you as at jay. when you can write essays judged as being first-class by oxbridge dons, then yeah, alright, i'll let you pass off the "arts and humanities subjects are easy, lol" crap. from what i can see, neither of you have any real intellectual weight when it comes to philosophy or theory/criticism. which is fine, as i've said. but i don't know why you think you're on some high-horse when it comes to intelligence. we've devoted ourselves to completely different fields. it's funny because 2 sane and half-intelligent adults in the outside world would never have this "my area of degree study was far more worthy and difficult than yours" discussion. instead you're both on an internet forum talking to people half your age throwing out the same childish "mine is better than yours!" argument. i've never tried to make any spurious comment about the sciences being a lesser pursuit than the humanities, but for some reason (i'm guessing a major chip on your shoulder- for jay the hatred of anything perceived as comfy middle-class 'leisure' class reading, and for you some traumatic experience at the whip of an uninspiring english teacher that forcefed you dickens. how tragic) you two think you are eminently qualified to be able to do that.
a sad, pathetic little man. you haunt a teenage gaming forum, refuse to ever post a picture of yourself, and constantly wade into discussions with a smarmy tone throwing off the same tired anti-neocon anti-america anti-israel thing, as if it's the last desperate vestiges of your critical faculties. well done dilbs. you're clearly enjoying your well-earned affluent middle-age. haha. sorry for typing so much i only get one post to say what i want to say so they're extra precious to me!!!
Wow, insecure much?Uzique wrote:
dilbert, i know a few people at imperial and have used ULU libraries and unions. maybe not an imperial seminar room, no, but what difference does that make? from the amount of shit you spout here about "lol literature" - can i ask you if you've ever sat in an undergraduate level lecture for the subject? guess there's not much point in you making comments either, then.
also: my university fees and funding is entirely my sole responsibility. my loans, my debts. thanks.
and rhul is decidedly top tier for my subject (ranked higher than ucl, which is third in the world if you go to the right websites), and is generally top-tier when it comes to academic research, too. it is consistently ranked higher than half of the russell group institutions, which i'm guessing from your veritable wealth of 'newspaper league table rankings' (since you surely aren't on the pulse of research assessments or current academic reputation) are the universities you deem to be 'highest' tier, because the times doth decree it so (based on 'student satisfaction' as much as anything, no less). anyway, i don't see how a university nearing the top20 in europe and in the world's top100 is not 'top tier'. for all intensive purposes in academia any institution in the russell or 1994 groups are worth their serious salt. rhul is one of the top institutions in the 1994 group, so again i'm not sure where the science grad from the 70's is getting his divine authority from about an english department. but, you can think what you like, really, doesn't do any harm to me.
and in reply to your asinine and frankly puerile karma... same comment to you as at jay. when you can write essays judged as being first-class by oxbridge dons, then yeah, alright, i'll let you pass off the "arts and humanities subjects are easy, lol" crap. from what i can see, neither of you have any real intellectual weight when it comes to philosophy or theory/criticism. which is fine, as i've said. but i don't know why you think you're on some high-horse when it comes to intelligence. we've devoted ourselves to completely different fields. it's funny because 2 sane and half-intelligent adults in the outside world would never have this "my area of degree study was far more worthy and difficult than yours" discussion. instead you're both on an internet forum talking to people half your age throwing out the same childish "mine is better than yours!" argument. i've never tried to make any spurious comment about the sciences being a lesser pursuit than the humanities, but for some reason (i'm guessing a major chip on your shoulder- for jay the hatred of anything perceived as comfy middle-class 'leisure' class reading, and for you some traumatic experience at the whip of an uninspiring english teacher that forcefed you dickens. how tragic) you two think you are eminently qualified to be able to do that.
a sad, pathetic little man. you haunt a teenage gaming forum, refuse to ever post a picture of yourself, and constantly wade into discussions with a smarmy tone throwing off the same tired anti-neocon anti-america anti-israel thing, as if it's the last desperate vestiges of your critical faculties. well done dilbs. you're clearly enjoying your well-earned affluent middle-age. haha. sorry for typing so much i only get one post to say what i want to say so they're extra precious to me!!!
For the second time, I haven't said 'mine is better than yours', simply that yours isn't as good as you think it is, as you'll find out if you ever venture outside your closed little world.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
My license is better than your degree though
brace for 5 pages of uziques bullshitPrivateVendetta wrote:
My license is better than your degree though
Which degree?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
All of them. They're all worthless. Everyone and anyone has a degree now.
Folks. Do some homework instead of flaming plox.
LAB REPORT TIME. I still don't know how to write these things.
edit: has anyone actually written one of these things? I always think I'm just writing bullshit.
edit: has anyone actually written one of these things? I always think I'm just writing bullshit.
Last edited by presidentsheep (2011-11-15 06:11:46)
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
oh god i remembered writing one in year 10presidentsheep wrote:
LAB REPORT TIME. I still don't know how to write these things.
edit: has anyone actually written one of these things? I always think I'm just writing bullshit.
isnt it just hypothesis, test methods, results, conclusions?