Define my future career path!

Nov 06, 2003 22:12

The background to this poll is that by the end of November I need to decide which industry group to specialise in ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 11

verlaine November 6 2003, 15:04:00 UTC
Why no option for "throw it all in and become a gaucho on the Argentinian steppes", though, that's what I want to know...!

Reply


frax November 6 2003, 15:08:55 UTC
I'm planning on specialising in intellectual property law with an emphasis on IT and you're the only person I could bear to network with! Therefore you should specialise in technology.

Reply


bateleur November 6 2003, 23:39:20 UTC
Over the course of your career I imagine technology and telecoms will drift pretty close together anyway so it's largely a matter of whether "technically strenuous" is something you look for in your work !

Reply

jiggery_pokery November 7 2003, 00:35:36 UTC
Some futurists reckon that life sciences and technology will drift pretty close together over time in exactly the same way. Of course, believing a futurist is always playing a lottery.

Reply

bateleur November 7 2003, 01:21:07 UTC
If they're right, that will take a lot longer.

The reason for the convergence of telecoms and tech is simply that it's becoming increasingly hard to make money on pure telecoms. As the telecoms giants search for ways to turn a decent profit they're tending to drift into tech activities.

This requires less of a crystal ball since it's happening now. Kinda like predicting a thunderstorm when standing under a huge black cloud and you feel raindrops !

Reply


ibid November 7 2003, 03:58:01 UTC
Well, whatever you like really. Toss a coin.

Reply

ealuscerwen November 9 2003, 06:21:53 UTC
A four sided coin?!

Reply


From the poli-sci perspective condign November 7 2003, 13:12:31 UTC
Please note that posting a poll on this in Livejournal is likely to have a heavy technological bias, for which you should discount. Sort of like going into a Catholic church and asking, "Who believes in the Holy Trinity, then, huh?" :) Not representative of society at large.

Reply

Re: From the poli-sci perspective lathany November 8 2003, 01:07:55 UTC
True, although being able to see who voted what tends to help.

Reply

Re: From the poli-sci perspective condign November 8 2003, 06:18:03 UTC
Sort of. From a psephological perspective, it would be as important to analyze the contribution of those who didn't vote as those who did--that the problem with self-selecting samples. And those, for obvious reasons, don't get recorded.

Reply

Re: From the poli-sci perspective onebyone November 8 2003, 07:07:11 UTC

Which is of course why the Australians shoot people who don't vote -the only statistically satisfactory way to account for their possible opinions is to entirely remove them from the electorate.

Well OK, so maybe they don't shoot them. But they're probably thinking about it.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up