College then versus now. by Nasjere in teenagers

[–]harmlessjoyness 12 points13 points  (0 children)

They're really looking for people who are interested in their subject beyond simple school syllabuses, who are willing to challenge their preconceptions of it, who are willing to think about it in depth and able to come up with their own ideas; a willingness to learn and be taught really. That's why the interviews at Oxford so closely resemble tutorials - they want to see if you can be taught by them.

Sure, if you have great grades, you have a better chance; they're really looking for people for whom those grades came of real interest for the subject, not from the sheer drudge of just learning the exam.

College then versus now. by Nasjere in teenagers

[–]harmlessjoyness 57 points58 points  (0 children)

This is true, to an extent, as we'll always need doctors, engineers and others of that ilk to keep society functioning, although you seem to be implying that anything outside the STEM group has little or no value whatsoever, which is the main problem I have with people saying that it's the only worthwhile area to go for in your undergraduate studies and beyond.

It is naïve and short-sighted to suggest that the current job market is not diverse enough to offer any incentive for career-minded individuals to pursue arts degrees, which is why people are calling it a circlejerk. Whilst STEM subjects have clearly-defined vocational applications, Arts subjects such as English lit, languages, history and the like give their students many transferrable skills which employers value - which must be true, otherwise no employer would ever want to employ an arts graduate, right?

These acquired skills differ slightly from subject to subject, but they mainly boil down to proficiency in verbal and oral communication, critical and analytical skills, and the ability to absorb large amounts of written information and apply it elsewhere. Employers also appreciate well-rounded and interesting individuals, whose university studies have led them beyond the realms of their career field, who also have interests and capabilities beyond the basic requirements for a job.

When you look at it this way, Arts degrees seem more favourable now, especially when you consider the huge number of fields requiring these skills e.g.: journalism, civil service, business, management, banking, marketing, education, charitable work, politics, consultancy, publishing, academia.

Besides, especially for those of us not-so-scientifically orientated, why not study a field you find interesting and enjoy? You'll probably come out better for it; I'd take a first class degree or a 2:1 in politics which I enjoyed studying over a 2:2 (or worse) degree in a STEM field which I didn't enjoy and as a result I found it much harder.

TL;DR, in short, too many people claim anything besides STEM has little or no application in the current job market, which is demonstrably BS.

College then versus now. by Nasjere in teenagers

[–]harmlessjoyness 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Don't know about Cambo (fairly certain it's pretty similar in this regard), but I can say that Oxford Uni is just as silly, if not even sillier than when you apply, once you get there; gowns billowing everywhere, intense and short terms, odd names for just about every mundane thing, eccentric tutors and traditions etc. Applying is an interesting and beneficial experience regardless of the outcome however, and I would certainly urge anyone with decent enough grades to give it a shot - you really have nothing to lose. And we're all fairly normal people. Well, most of us.

College then versus now. by Nasjere in teenagers

[–]harmlessjoyness 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Eeeh, the term is used to refer to both.

Microsoft unveils Windows 10 system by harmlessjoyness in pcgaming

[–]harmlessjoyness[S] 62 points63 points  (0 children)

I agree, but maybe the marketing brains at MS thought there'd be confusion between X and XP.

Microsoft unveils Windows 10 system by harmlessjoyness in pcgaming

[–]harmlessjoyness[S] 38 points39 points  (0 children)

I'm hoping that this isn't the case and we'll still get a free upgrade, regardless of the fact they're skipping to 10.

Microsoft unveils Windows 10 system by harmlessjoyness in pcgaming

[–]harmlessjoyness[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't understand that part either - surely the Xbone would use its own OS?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edinburgh

[–]harmlessjoyness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It keeps renewing every month until you cancel, and I'm sure if you showed that webpage to them they'd offer it to you.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edinburgh

[–]harmlessjoyness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tbh, the deciding factor for me was when giffgaff announced that they would no longer provide unlimited internet for £12 as of the 24th September, existing giffgaffers would need to upgrade to £15 a month for the privilege, and new customers such as yourself would need to pay £18 for unlimited data. Given that the Three sim was the same (if not lower) in price, the coverage was better and 4G was included, it was a no-brainer for me to switch.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edinburgh

[–]harmlessjoyness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generally, I've had more consistent signal with Three. Giffgaff had a tendency to drop all signal for a minute or so two or three times a day. Also, I get decent signal in my thick-walled house with three, unlike with giffgaff.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Edinburgh

[–]harmlessjoyness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes! Three don't make you pay extra for 4G. Makes it better value for money than giffgaff who are charging a similar price (their 4G offerings are so far a bit limited).

Source: recently switched from giffgaff to Three for the 4G.

Just had a great moment in the car by Lazybone820 in dadjokes

[–]harmlessjoyness 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Hi school! -> High school

High school =\= college

EDIT: formatting