The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
What's the integration of cos2x?
Page:
You're not disputing any.
Hedfix wrote:
> Actually certain places (like banks) want people straight from
> finishing their GCSE's and since a pretty high proportion of people
> graduate now having a degree is counting for less and less.
>
> Employers want people with experience that's applicable to situations
> and work in the real world.
What are you basing that on? Sure, if you work in a certain industry that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a priority in the eyes of an employer.
>
> And since when has a 'better' career and 'more money' been 100%
> linked?
I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two examples of things that may come from having a degree or qualification in maths or any subject.
>
> Also there is such a thing as being over-qualified
I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone lower down than them.
> Actually certain places (like banks) want people straight from
> finishing their GCSE's and since a pretty high proportion of people
> graduate now having a degree is counting for less and less.
>
> Employers want people with experience that's applicable to situations
> and work in the real world.
What are you basing that on? Sure, if you work in a certain industry that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a priority in the eyes of an employer.
>
> And since when has a 'better' career and 'more money' been 100%
> linked?
I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two examples of things that may come from having a degree or qualification in maths or any subject.
>
> Also there is such a thing as being over-qualified
I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone lower down than them.
J-42 wrote:
>
> What are you basing that on?
Well.. banks, as I've already said.
>Sure, if you work in a certain industry
> that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a
> priority in the eyes of an employer.
Yes and having a degree isn't always the best way. Apprentiships (sp?) and training at technical colleges etc can wield better results and actually get people the skills they need for work.
> I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two
> examples of things that may come from having a degree or
> qualification in maths or any subject.
So you could have suggested 'getting beaten up' and 'a huge over draft' aswell then? :D
> I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
Well I tried to give an example but you seem to have been unable to completely follow it.
>
> and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
>
> The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business
> is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for
> their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone
> lower down than them.
'Lower down than them' - exactly. So what happens if your degree/skills over-shadow people higher than you who are trying to just fill a position below them AND keep their job? In some circumstances you won't get the job.
>
> What are you basing that on?
Well.. banks, as I've already said.
>Sure, if you work in a certain industry
> that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a
> priority in the eyes of an employer.
Yes and having a degree isn't always the best way. Apprentiships (sp?) and training at technical colleges etc can wield better results and actually get people the skills they need for work.
> I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two
> examples of things that may come from having a degree or
> qualification in maths or any subject.
So you could have suggested 'getting beaten up' and 'a huge over draft' aswell then? :D
> I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
Well I tried to give an example but you seem to have been unable to completely follow it.
>
> and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
>
> The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business
> is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for
> their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone
> lower down than them.
'Lower down than them' - exactly. So what happens if your degree/skills over-shadow people higher than you who are trying to just fill a position below them AND keep their job? In some circumstances you won't get the job.
Hedfix wrote:
> J-42 wrote:
>
> What are you basing that on?
>
> Well.. banks, as I've already said.
It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
>
> >Sure, if you work in a certain industry
> that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a
> priority in the eyes of an employer.
>
> Yes and having a degree isn't always the best way. Apprentiships
> (sp?) and training at technical colleges etc can wield better results
> and actually get people the skills they need for work.
WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results than a "technical college" why does the word "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those of a technical college or apprenticship?
>
>
> I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two
> examples of things that may come from having a degree or
> qualification in maths or any subject.
>
> So you could have suggested 'getting beaten up' and 'a huge over
> draft' aswell then? :D
>
>
> I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
>
> Well I tried to give an example but you seem to have been unable to
> completely follow it.
You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
>
>
> and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
>
> The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business
> is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for
> their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone
> lower down than them.
>
> 'Lower down than them' - exactly. So what happens if your
> degree/skills over-shadow people higher than you who are trying to
> just fill a position below them AND keep their job?
They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as you said before, experience is important too.
In some
> circumstances you won't get the job
I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
> J-42 wrote:
>
> What are you basing that on?
>
> Well.. banks, as I've already said.
It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
>
> >Sure, if you work in a certain industry
> that may be true, but in most specialised jobs being qualified is a
> priority in the eyes of an employer.
>
> Yes and having a degree isn't always the best way. Apprentiships
> (sp?) and training at technical colleges etc can wield better results
> and actually get people the skills they need for work.
WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results than a "technical college" why does the word "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those of a technical college or apprenticship?
>
>
> I didn't say that. I didn't say they were linked at all. I gave two
> examples of things that may come from having a degree or
> qualification in maths or any subject.
>
> So you could have suggested 'getting beaten up' and 'a huge over
> draft' aswell then? :D
>
>
> I haven't heard of this. Please explain.
>
> Well I tried to give an example but you seem to have been unable to
> completely follow it.
You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
>
>
> and funnily enough
> the people doing the hiring can feel threatened if you're more
> qualified to do their job than they are.
>
> The only way I thijnk of that situation is if an owner of a business
> is looking for a partner, in which case they would want the best for
> their business. In any other case, an employer will emply someone
> lower down than them.
>
> 'Lower down than them' - exactly. So what happens if your
> degree/skills over-shadow people higher than you who are trying to
> just fill a position below them AND keep their job?
They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as you said before, experience is important too.
In some
> circumstances you won't get the job
I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
J-42 wrote:
>
> It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
HSBC for one.
> WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results
> than a "technical college" why does the word
> "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those of
> a technical college or apprenticship?
I'd hazard a guess that most universities don't focus as much on everyday skills compared to technical colleges.
> You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said
> that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
Actually I DID mention 'over-qualified' it was a seperate point.
>
>
> They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is
> apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as
> you said before, experience is important too.
> I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully
> qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to
> emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
Here you're contradicting yourself. Are they 'applying for the wrong job' or should they be hired 'because they are fully qualified'?
As for 'why be threatened'? Because the person they're hiring is more qualified than they are and applying for a lower position that's why: that certainly could be viewed as putting the person hiring's job at risk. Infact you've answered the question yourself with 'to employ the best person', but what if they person your employing can do your job better than you? Bit of a threat I'd say.
AS for 'I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully qualified'.
You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
>
> It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
HSBC for one.
> WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results
> than a "technical college" why does the word
> "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those of
> a technical college or apprenticship?
I'd hazard a guess that most universities don't focus as much on everyday skills compared to technical colleges.
> You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said
> that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
Actually I DID mention 'over-qualified' it was a seperate point.
>
>
> They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is
> apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as
> you said before, experience is important too.
> I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully
> qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to
> emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
Here you're contradicting yourself. Are they 'applying for the wrong job' or should they be hired 'because they are fully qualified'?
As for 'why be threatened'? Because the person they're hiring is more qualified than they are and applying for a lower position that's why: that certainly could be viewed as putting the person hiring's job at risk. Infact you've answered the question yourself with 'to employ the best person', but what if they person your employing can do your job better than you? Bit of a threat I'd say.
AS for 'I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully qualified'.
You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
Hedfix wrote:
> J-42 wrote:
>
> It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
>
> HSBC for one.
>
>
> WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results
> than a "technical college" why does the word
> "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those
> of
> a technical college or apprenticship?
>
> I'd hazard a guess that most universities don't focus as much on
> everyday skills compared to technical colleges.
>
>
> You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said
> that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
>
> Actually I DID mention 'over-qualified' it was a seperate point.
>
> >
> They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is
> apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as
> you said before, experience is important too.
>
> I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully
> qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to
> emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
>
> Here you're contradicting yourself. Are they 'applying for the wrong
> job' or should they be hired 'because they are fully qualified'?
If someone has the ideal qualifications needed for the job they're applying for, hire them. If they have more qualifications than the person higher up than them, they should be applying for that job.
>
> As for 'why be threatened'? Because the person they're hiring is more
> qualified than they are and applying for a lower position that's why:
If you have heaps of qualification, you're not likely to apply for a job fairly low down. If it's an executive position, the owner will probably employ the applicant.
> that certainly could be viewed as putting the person hiring's job at
> risk. Infact you've answered the question yourself with 'to employ
> the best person', but what if they person your employing can do your
> job better than you? Bit of a threat I'd say.
>
> AS for 'I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're
> fully qualified'.
>
> You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I
> think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job
> although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
Point taken, but a little OTT.
> J-42 wrote:
>
> It seemed like a general statement. "Banks" Which banks?
>
> HSBC for one.
>
>
> WHo's to say a university won't offer the same if not better results
> than a "technical college" why does the word
> "university" mean you can't gain similar skills to those
> of
> a technical college or apprenticship?
>
> I'd hazard a guess that most universities don't focus as much on
> everyday skills compared to technical colleges.
>
>
> You didn't mention "over qualified at all". You just said
> that banks want people fresh from their GCSEs.
>
> Actually I DID mention 'over-qualified' it was a seperate point.
>
> >
> They're apllying for the wrong job. If the qualified person is
> apllyig for a different job altogether, why be threatened? Also, as
> you said before, experience is important too.
>
> I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're fully
> qualified. The person who is employing the apllicant has a job to
> emply the best person, so i'm sure they would fulfill this.
>
> Here you're contradicting yourself. Are they 'applying for the wrong
> job' or should they be hired 'because they are fully qualified'?
If someone has the ideal qualifications needed for the job they're applying for, hire them. If they have more qualifications than the person higher up than them, they should be applying for that job.
>
> As for 'why be threatened'? Because the person they're hiring is more
> qualified than they are and applying for a lower position that's why:
If you have heaps of qualification, you're not likely to apply for a job fairly low down. If it's an executive position, the owner will probably employ the applicant.
> that certainly could be viewed as putting the person hiring's job at
> risk. Infact you've answered the question yourself with 'to employ
> the best person', but what if they person your employing can do your
> job better than you? Bit of a threat I'd say.
>
> AS for 'I don't see the logic in not hiring someone because they're
> fully qualified'.
>
> You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I
> think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job
> although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
Point taken, but a little OTT.
J-42 wrote:
>
> If someone has the ideal qualifications needed for the job they're
> applying for, hire them. If they have more qualifications than the
> person higher up than them, they should be applying for that job.
Ah but the vacancy is already filled so they have to start somewhere. Are you still suggesting the person above them shouldn't see them as a threat?
>
> If you have heaps of qualification, you're not likely to apply for a
> job fairly low down.
People do. Life-long students, that guy out of american beauty.... :D
If it's an executive position, the owner will
> probably employ the applicant.
Why? Some places have to advertise jobs even though they intend to promote someone from within the company to the position. Then there's the possibility they'll give a friend (or a friend of a friend) the job and many other factors.
>
> Point taken, but a little OTT.
Yeah, couldn't be bothered with an plausible situation so I settled for a blatant example. :D
>
> If someone has the ideal qualifications needed for the job they're
> applying for, hire them. If they have more qualifications than the
> person higher up than them, they should be applying for that job.
Ah but the vacancy is already filled so they have to start somewhere. Are you still suggesting the person above them shouldn't see them as a threat?
>
> If you have heaps of qualification, you're not likely to apply for a
> job fairly low down.
People do. Life-long students, that guy out of american beauty.... :D
If it's an executive position, the owner will
> probably employ the applicant.
Why? Some places have to advertise jobs even though they intend to promote someone from within the company to the position. Then there's the possibility they'll give a friend (or a friend of a friend) the job and many other factors.
>
> Point taken, but a little OTT.
Yeah, couldn't be bothered with an plausible situation so I settled for a blatant example. :D
J-42 wrote:
> You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I
> think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job
> although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
>
> Point taken, but a little OTT.
[edit]Nope, too much info.
> You could hire a professor to put rubberbands in boxes but somehow I
> think the professor would be somewhat over-qualified for the job
> although obviously they would be capable of doing it. :D
>
> Point taken, but a little OTT.
[edit]Nope, too much info.
Hedfix wrote:
> Ok, just so we know, what are the practical uses for a calculation
> like this in real life outside of school/education?
Electrics, but it's alot more difficult.
> Ok, just so we know, what are the practical uses for a calculation
> like this in real life outside of school/education?
Electrics, but it's alot more difficult.
øne-eye wrote:
> Hedfix wrote:
> Ok, just so we know, what are the practical uses for a calculation
> like this in real life outside of school/education?
>
> All that calculation crap has no use, it just makes those who can do
> it feel like they got one up on the average man in the street. One
> day the average man will give everyone who isn't average the
> finger...oh yes! ;)
Is this average man a bender by any chance?
> Hedfix wrote:
> Ok, just so we know, what are the practical uses for a calculation
> like this in real life outside of school/education?
>
> All that calculation crap has no use, it just makes those who can do
> it feel like they got one up on the average man in the street. One
> day the average man will give everyone who isn't average the
> finger...oh yes! ;)
Is this average man a bender by any chance?
Page: