Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Academic education is Israel

Expand Messages
  • peleg_w@yahoo.com
    Hi. I m currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the atuda I ll soon be required to apply to various universities in Israel. I want to study
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 6, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi.

      I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
      atuda I'll soon be required to apply to various universities in
      Israel.

      I want to study CS (Perhaps combined with managment), and would like
      to know where is the best place for me to apply.

      My Bagrut grades are (Most of them are projected):

      Physics: 85
      Maths: 80-85
      English (Regular 5 points + 2 translation): 92
      CS: 99
      History: 95
      Bible: 70
      Literature: 70
      Ezrahut: 82
      Language: 60

      My psychometric exam will be about 750.

      My question is:
      1)With these grades, where should I apply?
    • Dan Kenigsberg
      ... WHY? Maybe you should think again. Remember - not only are you determining what you are going to do, but also what a 27 years old man is going to do in the
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        > I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
        > atuda

        WHY? Maybe you should think again. Remember - not only are you determining what
        you are going to do, but also what a 27 years old man is going to do in the next
        decade. Are you sure he will want to wear green outfit? Or go through a
        bureaucratic ordeal when he wants to go abroad, or see a doctor? And see his
        friends having fun in south America while he's doing Katzin Toran? Would he
        think of you kindly?

        I'm not saying not to consider it, or apply for it. But check out your other
        options before you commit.
      • Nadav Har'El
        ... As Dan said, also consider if you really want to be an Atudai. Becoming an atudai means a fixed path for you until the age of (roughly) 27 - you study
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, Jun 06, 2001, peleg_w@... wrote about "[hackers-il] Academic education is Israel":
          > Hi.
          >
          > I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
          > atuda I'll soon be required to apply to various universities in
          > Israel.

          As Dan said, also consider if you really want to be an Atudai. Becoming
          an atudai means a fixed path for you until the age of (roughly) 27 - you
          study until you're 21 and then work for the army for 6 years, without (hardly)
          chance of parole ;)
          This used to make a lot of sense when it was hard to get a job after getting
          a degree (the army pays pretty nicely for these last 3 years, especially if
          you know how bend the army's salary laws for your own good), and when having
          a BA was considered enough. Nowadays, the situation is slightly different:
          getting a job (especially in CS, and even now (if you're good)) is easy,
          and more people want higher degrees.

          As an Atudai (well, sort of - I don't want to get into the whole story here)
          meant that I had to do my MSc (toar sheni) while working almost full-time,
          and it was hell. It didn't allow me to enjoy my studies, and it meant that
          it took me almost 6 years to finish my MSc (I finally finished it after taking
          a 2 month vacation and concentrated on writing the thesis). I was lucky to
          be in actual army control for only 2 years (and that was also pretty lax)
          and then 4 years without any army beaurocracy. I have no idea how anyone would
          possibly remain sane after being under actual army beaurocracy (and quite
          strict control on almost every aspect of your life) for 6 years ;)

          But when I look at other things the army offers people who want to work in
          CS-related areas, like taking a short programming course and then signing
          for a total of 4.5 years, or studying to be an Handesai and then signing for
          a total of 5 years, Atuda may not be all that bad...

          If I was an MK, I would pass a law making the 36-month army service a MAXIMUM
          mandatory service. Kids should not be allowed at age of 17 to sign for 4.5-6
          years when the law only mandates 3 years, especially not by seducing them with
          nice words (you'll work in computers and get a good job later! Yeah right -
          I've seen people who were told that and then stuck in a boring job 5 years
          rebooting Windows computers, and didn't learn any useful skills). Heck, kids
          that age aren't even allowed to sign by themselves a much less
          fate-determining contract... Only when someone finishes their 3 year service
          they should be allowed to choose to stay on, if they wish. Or, if nobody
          wants to stay in the military, create seperate bodies for some of the
          technical areas the military needs - see for example the American NSA
          (www.nsa.gov).

          > My Bagrut grades are (Most of them are projected):
          >
          > Physics: 85
          > Maths: 80-85
          > English (Regular 5 points + 2 translation): 92
          > CS: 99
          > History: 95
          > Bible: 70
          > Literature: 70
          > Ezrahut: 82
          > Language: 60

          You should check which of the universities will accept you with these grades,
          and then make a more informed decision. Do you have 5 unit math? I think
          the Technion has such a requirement.

          I'd say apply to both the Technion and HUJI (you didn't say where you live...).
          I believe these are considered to be the best CS departments in Israel (I
          don't know about TAU - I'll let other people comment on it).
          I'd stay away from management in Toar Rishon, and later do an MBA (but don't
          take my recommendation on this subject - I wouldn't be caught dead doing an
          MBA ;))

          > My psychometric exam will be about 750.

          I think you should study Astrology instead. How do you make these projections
          of bagrut and psychometric grades? ;)


          --
          Nadav Har'El | Thursday, Jun 7 2001, 16 Sivan 5761
          nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
          Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Share your knowledge. It's a way to
          http://nadav.harel.org.il |achieve immortality.
        • mulix
          ... you are avoiding an important issue (from the army s perspective) - the training required to bring the person to the level his position requires. some
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:

            > On Wed, Jun 06, 2001, peleg_w@... wrote about "[hackers-il] Academic education is Israel":

            > > I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
            > > atuda I'll soon be required to apply to various universities in
            > > Israel.
            >
            > If I was an MK, I would pass a law making the 36-month army service a MAXIMUM
            > mandatory service. Kids should not be allowed at age of 17 to sign for 4.5-6
            > years when the law only mandates 3 years, especially not by seducing them with
            > nice words (you'll work in computers and get a good job later! Yeah right -
            > I've seen people who were told that and then stuck in a boring job 5 years
            > rebooting Windows computers, and didn't learn any useful skills). Heck, kids
            > that age aren't even allowed to sign by themselves a much less
            > fate-determining contract... Only when someone finishes their 3 year service
            > they should be allowed to choose to stay on, if they wish. Or, if nobody
            > wants to stay in the military, create seperate bodies for some of the
            > technical areas the military needs - see for example the American NSA
            > (www.nsa.gov).

            you are avoiding an important issue (from the army's perspective) - the
            training required to bring the person to the level his position
            requires. some positions do not tolerate "learning on the job", for
            example, a fighter pilot... from the army's persepective, a two year
            long training, or even a year long training, do not justify themselves
            unless the person agrees to sign for more than the basic three years.
            even a position (such as the one i was in) where the training is
            relatively short (because you only get in if you already know what you
            are doing) but you constantly learn on the job (on the army's time or
            off of it) new skills and techniques only makes sense for the army if
            you agree to sign some 'keva'. plus, there is the law of supply and
            demand - as long as some (good) people are willing to agree to the
            army's conditions, the army can make all the conditions it wants to, be
            they 6 years or 16.

            > > My Bagrut grades are (Most of them are projected):
            > >
            > > Physics: 85
            > > Maths: 80-85
            > > English (Regular 5 points + 2 translation): 92
            > > CS: 99
            > > History: 95
            > > Bible: 70
            > > Literature: 70
            > > Ezrahut: 82
            > > Language: 60
            >
            > You should check which of the universities will accept you with these grades,
            > and then make a more informed decision. Do you have 5 unit math? I think
            > the Technion has such a requirement.

            the technion does not have such a formal requirement, as far as i know,
            but since 5 point math get a double bonus (they count as 10 points)
            plus a 30% (if i remember correctly) modifier, getting in without 5
            points can be almost impossible. the competition, especially for CS, is
            fierce :(

            --
            mulix
            http://www.advogato.com/person/mulix

            linux/reboot.h: #define LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC1 0xfee1dead
          • Nadav Har'El
            ... No, this is crap, and this is exactly the kind of crap they feed Atuda prospects (I was seduced into signing for 6 years even though I wans t an Atudai!
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              On Thu, Jun 07, 2001, mulix wrote about "Re: [hackers-il] Academic education is Israel":
              > you are avoiding an important issue (from the army's perspective) - the
              > training required to bring the person to the level his position
              > requires. some positions do not tolerate "learning on the job", for
              > example, a fighter pilot... from the army's persepective, a two year
              > long training, or even a year long training, do not justify themselves
              > unless the person agrees to sign for more than the basic three years.

              No, this is crap, and this is exactly the kind of crap they feed Atuda
              prospects (I was seduced into signing for 6 years even though I wans't
              an Atudai! But I'm starting to tell my long, boring, story..).

              Every company would love to have trained people to stay with it. Every
              company would prefer people with 3 years of experience to people without
              experience. But no company accepts people without experience by forcing
              them to sign, in advance, for 6 years. That's just not an accepted practice
              in democratic society.

              You can offer incentives for people to stay after 3 years: making the army
              service more enjoyable (is crappy food an medical service REALLY NECESSARY
              in the army?), making technical people part of external DoD bodies not
              ruled by army beaurocy (e.g., see the NSA example I gave before). Treat
              people like human beings, respect them, and make them feel like they make
              a different (rather than being a 300-shekel-per-month Windows rebooter).
              You'd be surprise but most people don't stay in the army (or try to quit
              in the middle, using all sort of ugly tricks) for the way they are treated,
              not because (for example) they would get more money outside.

              The reason for my external-bodies suggestion is that the people we're talking
              about, hackers, nerds, and the similar populations, hate living under strict
              disciplanry control, and such control is not needed (and is in fact counter-
              productive) for the work they are many times supposed to do. They don't like
              to wear starched green clothes all the time. They don't like to polish their
              shoes. They don't like to be told how/when to work. They don't like to be
              mistreated by the medical staff (where the default is to assume you're
              pretending to be sick - once I was home sick 2 weeks just because they
              mistreated me in the first couple of days). They don't like to be promoted
              based on pazam rather than what they actually do. They even less like to
              be promoted based on irrelevant military courses (such as kurs kzinim).

              > even a position (such as the one i was in) where the training is
              > relatively short (because you only get in if you already know what you
              > are doing) but you constantly learn on the job (on the army's time or
              > off of it) new skills and techniques only makes sense for the army if
              > you agree to sign some 'keva'. plus, there is the law of supply and
              > demand - as long as some (good) people are willing to agree to the
              > army's conditions, the army can make all the conditions it wants to, be
              > they 6 years or 16.

              What you're saying makes my blood boil ;) Of course it "makes sense for the
              army". You know what - it would make sense for them to sign people for 30
              years. Why bother trying to convince people to stay in the army, when you
              can coeerce them into it? Why not say to all new recruits

              "You know what, we have two kinds of open positions: either clean toilets
              for 3 years, or we have interesting things to do, but you'll need to
              sign for 10 years (but don't worry, we'll pay you for the last 7 years)."

              This is not hypothetical - this is *exactly* what is happening, with all
              sorts of "kadats", atudai, handesai, and similar plans. As I said above
              I wasn't an Atudai at all (I finished my BA before I was enlisted), but
              they still managed to got me to sign for 6 years. Actually, after 2 years
              I was given the choice (again, long story...) and I chose to stay, out of
              my free will, for 4 more years, so why did they need me to sign for 6 years
              in the first place?

              The legislative branch must come and say NO! to this. The army should not
              be able to do anything that "makes sense for the army". Not only is this
              absolutely not fair and immoral, but we need well-educated and smart people
              outside the army too! Every year the army wastes from a smart person's
              life (I saw many such young people) is a year that person won't be working
              in the industry. One of the reasons we can afford such a huge army (by
              huge I mean cost-wise, not number of people) is that we have such a large
              per-capita income and taxes.

              If you don't think that the army wastes peoples' years Just Because They
              Can, you probably haven't been in the army...

              The "law of supply and demand" is absolutely irrelevant. The army is the
              worst kind of monopoly that exists (because you're forced to buy its product,
              i.e., serve it for at least 3 years), and it must be controled by the
              legislative branch before it devours our society. Imagine another monopoly,
              Microsoft, doing what the army does. You'd be told something like

              "You now *have* to spend $1000 on our products and use only them for
              a year. We can sell you Microsoft Bob [an example of a useless
              product] for that $1000, but we'll give you another option -
              buy Microsoft Office for $2000. What would you prefer? Hey, we're a
              very nice company - we're giving you CHOICE!"

              --
              Nadav Har'El | Thursday, Jun 7 2001, 16 Sivan 5761
              nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
              Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |I had a lovely evening. Unfortunately,
              http://nadav.harel.org.il |this wasn't it. - Groucho Marx
            • Chen Shapira
              ... BTW, if you don t like Atuda, you can always leave, join the army for the mandatory 3 years and then continue on. ... With any grades, apply everywhere.
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                > I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
                > atuda I'll soon be required to apply to various universities in
                > Israel.
                >
                > I want to study CS (Perhaps combined with managment), and would like
                > to know where is the best place for me to apply.

                BTW, if you don't like Atuda, you can always leave, join the army for the
                mandatory 3 years and then continue on.


                > My question is:
                > 1)With these grades, where should I apply?

                With any grades, apply everywhere.
                You can decide after you get accepted, which is a more educated decision.
              • mulix
                [ warning, very long reply and obviously a heated issue for nadav ] ... i beg to disagree. consider two equally good candidates for position foo. which one
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  [ warning, very long reply and obviously a heated issue for nadav ]

                  On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:

                  > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001, mulix wrote about "Re: [hackers-il] Academic education is Israel":
                  > > you are avoiding an important issue (from the army's perspective) - the
                  > > training required to bring the person to the level his position
                  > > requires. some positions do not tolerate "learning on the job", for
                  > > example, a fighter pilot... from the army's persepective, a two year
                  > > long training, or even a year long training, do not justify themselves
                  > > unless the person agrees to sign for more than the basic three years.
                  >
                  > No, this is crap, and this is exactly the kind of crap they feed Atuda
                  > prospects (I was seduced into signing for 6 years even though I wans't
                  > an Atudai! But I'm starting to tell my long, boring, story..).

                  i beg to disagree. consider two equally good candidates for position
                  foo. which one should the army choose? the one who will do the training,
                  do the minimum time required on the job and then leave, or the one who
                  will guarantee that he will stay for some extended amount of time,
                  therefore doing the job better, by virtue of accumulated expereience?
                  and yes, these candidates are both EQUALLY good.

                  > Every company would love to have trained people to stay with it. Every
                  > company would prefer people with 3 years of experience to people without
                  > experience. But no company accepts people without experience by forcing
                  > them to sign, in advance, for 6 years. That's just not an accepted practice
                  > in democratic society.

                  ehm, this is the army. the army operates under unique circumstances, in
                  that virtually all of its man-power starts untrained and without
                  experience. show me a company that starts this way and i'll show you a
                  chronicle of bankruptcy-in-happening.

                  > You can offer incentives for people to stay after 3 years: making the army
                  > service more enjoyable (is crappy food an medical service REALLY NECESSARY
                  > in the army?), making technical people part of external DoD bodies not
                  > ruled by army beaurocy (e.g., see the NSA example I gave before). Treat
                  > people like human beings, respect them, and make them feel like they make
                  > a different (rather than being a 300-shekel-per-month Windows rebooter).
                  > You'd be surprise but most people don't stay in the army (or try to quit
                  > in the middle, using all sort of ugly tricks) for the way they are treated,
                  > not because (for example) they would get more money outside.

                  actually, the unit i was in was really superb in all of these respects,
                  and i still chose to leave once my three years were up. not because of
                  my unit, which was incredible (and an excellent preamble to a high
                  tech career), but because it was still a part of the army and
                  occasionally you were reminded of that in the most unpleasant ways
                  you can imagine.

                  > The reason for my external-bodies suggestion is that the people we're talking
                  > about, hackers, nerds, and the similar populations, hate living under strict
                  > disciplanry control, and such control is not needed (and is in fact counter-
                  > productive) for the work they are many times supposed to do. They don't like
                  > to wear starched green clothes all the time. They don't like to polish their
                  > shoes. They don't like to be told how/when to work. They don't like to be
                  > mistreated by the medical staff (where the default is to assume you're
                  > pretending to be sick - once I was home sick 2 weeks just because they
                  > mistreated me in the first couple of days). They don't like to be promoted
                  > based on pazam rather than what they actually do. They even less like to
                  > be promoted based on irrelevant military courses (such as kurs
                  > kzinim).

                  again, the unit i was in did not have much in the way of control,
                  exactly because it was counterintuitive to production. and i know of
                  many other places, where your average hacker/nerd/cs graduate is likely
                  to end up, where it is the army in name only. most of the time. it's the
                  time when you are forcefully reminded that you ARE in the army that
                  cause you to leave in the end.

                  > > even a position (such as the one i was in) where the training is
                  > > relatively short (because you only get in if you already know what you
                  > > are doing) but you constantly learn on the job (on the army's time or
                  > > off of it) new skills and techniques only makes sense for the army if
                  > > you agree to sign some 'keva'. plus, there is the law of supply and
                  > > demand - as long as some (good) people are willing to agree to the
                  > > army's conditions, the army can make all the conditions it wants to, be
                  > > they 6 years or 16.
                  >
                  > What you're saying makes my blood boil ;) Of course it "makes sense for the
                  > army". You know what - it would make sense for them to sign people for 30
                  > years. Why bother trying to convince people to stay in the army, when you
                  > can coeerce them into it? Why not say to all new recruits
                  >
                  > "You know what, we have two kinds of open positions: either clean toilets
                  > for 3 years, or we have interesting things to do, but you'll need to
                  > sign for 10 years (but don't worry, we'll pay you for the last 7 years)."

                  why bother? because coerced people are far less productive then people
                  who vulonteered or were persuaded to remain. witness the large army
                  presence at the last technion job fair, for example.

                  > This is not hypothetical - this is *exactly* what is happening, with all
                  > sorts of "kadats", atudai, handesai, and similar plans. As I said above
                  > I wasn't an Atudai at all (I finished my BA before I was enlisted), but
                  > they still managed to got me to sign for 6 years. Actually, after 2 years
                  > I was given the choice (again, long story...) and I chose to stay, out of
                  > my free will, for 4 more years, so why did they need me to sign for 6 years
                  > in the first place?

                  excellent question. because that way they can plan in advance on having
                  the necessary man-power? or simply because they can and people will
                  agree to their conditions?

                  i understand you dont think people should not be _given_ this sort of
                  choice. do tell me, however, how you can justify the two years of
                  training a fighter pilot undergoes before he starts being "productive",
                  if he's only productive for one year and then he is free to leave? he
                  might choose to stay, but he might also leave. how can the army justify
                  that option economically?

                  > The legislative branch must come and say NO! to this. The army should not
                  > be able to do anything that "makes sense for the army". Not only is this
                  > absolutely not fair and immoral, but we need well-educated and smart people
                  > outside the army too! Every year the army wastes from a smart person's
                  > life (I saw many such young people) is a year that person won't be working
                  > in the industry. One of the reasons we can afford such a huge army (by
                  > huge I mean cost-wise, not number of people) is that we have such a large
                  > per-capita income and taxes.

                  i think it can be safely said you had a bad army experience, and i'm
                  sorry for that. i, on the other hand, learned somethign new every day in
                  the army, did the things i love with people who shared my passion for
                  writing code, and accumulated lots of experience. all this, without
                  signing for one extra minute of keva. i dont doubt many people share
                  your misgivings about the army, but neither do i doubt many peolpe share
                  my kind of story. in recent newspaper articles, my unit was called "the
                  hightech greenhouse of israel". how much of that per-capita income you talk about
                  is coming from people who, once they leave the army use _the knowledge
                  they learned in the army_ to make many millions of dollars? (checkpoint
                  comes to mind here...)

                  > If you don't think that the army wastes peoples' years Just Because They
                  > Can, you probably haven't been in the army...

                  oh, i have been, and i hated some of it, and i loved some of it, and all
                  in all, it's a matter of luck. what you do, where you do it and who you
                  do it with are the difference between X years of heaven or X years of
                  hell.

                  > The "law of supply and demand" is absolutely irrelevant. The army is the
                  > worst kind of monopoly that exists (because you're forced to buy its product,
                  > i.e., serve it for at least 3 years), and it must be controled by the
                  > legislative branch before it devours our society. Imagine another monopoly,
                  > Microsoft, doing what the army does. You'd be told something like
                  >
                  > "You now *have* to spend $1000 on our products and use only them for
                  > a year. We can sell you Microsoft Bob [an example of a useless
                  > product] for that $1000, but we'll give you another option -
                  > buy Microsoft Office for $2000. What would you prefer? Hey, we're a
                  > very nice company - we're giving you CHOICE!"

                  how is this the same, nadav? again, consider two equally good
                  candidates. which one should the army choose for the position? the one
                  who will bring more use to the army, by staying and doing the job
                  longer (and because of accumulated experience, better). plain and
                  simple, dont you agree?
                  --
                  mulix
                  http://www.advogato.com/person/mulix

                  linux/reboot.h: #define LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC1 0xfee1dead
                • Nadav Har'El
                  ... Every company has some experienced people, and many inexperienced people (which are also paid less). Just look around you, in everything from waiting
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Thu, Jun 07, 2001, mulix wrote about "Re: [hackers-il] Academic education is Israel":
                    > > Every company would love to have trained people to stay with it. Every
                    > > company would prefer people with 3 years of experience to people without
                    > > experience. But no company accepts people without experience by forcing
                    > > them to sign, in advance, for 6 years. That's just not an accepted practice
                    > > in democratic society.
                    >
                    > ehm, this is the army. the army operates under unique circumstances, in
                    > that virtually all of its man-power starts untrained and without
                    > experience. show me a company that starts this way and i'll show you a
                    > chronicle of bankruptcy-in-happening.

                    Every company has some experienced people, and many inexperienced people (which
                    are also paid less). Just look around you, in everything from waiting tables in
                    restaurants to high-tech companies. Of course, everybody would just *love*
                    to have only experienced people, but that just doesn't happen.

                    Besides, the whole idea of Atuda was to let you get some knowledge and
                    experience before you join the army, so you'd be productive right away.
                    True, you won't be productive on the first month, but take my word for it -
                    it doesn't take a person 3 years to become productive. In my service, I
                    considered myself productive after 6 months.

                    > actually, the unit i was in was really superb in all of these respects,
                    > and i still chose to leave once my three years were up. not because of
                    > my unit, which was incredible (and an excellent preamble to a high
                    > tech career), but because it was still a part of the army and
                    > occasionally you were reminded of that in the most unpleasant ways
                    > you can imagine.

                    Read what you write again: read the first line of the above paragraph, and then
                    the last two lines. Don't you see a contradiction? Many people tell me
                    "my army unit is not a normal unit and it was wonderful..." but then go on
                    saying "but the food was uneatable, and I couldn't bare staying there
                    another day and eat that food" or "I couldn't get decent medical treatment
                    and on one occasion I nearly died". Somehow people don't see the
                    contradiction...

                    Unfortunately, many people don't even have the experience you had: they
                    simply had a crappy service, like the reboot-the-Windows-PC guy I told you
                    about. I know plenty of people who had service similar to that, supposedly
                    in the high-tech area but in actuality it was simply a way to get them to
                    sign for more years.

                    > again, the unit i was in did not have much in the way of control,
                    > exactly because it was counterintuitive to production. and i know of
                    > many other places, where your average hacker/nerd/cs graduate is likely
                    > to end up, where it is the army in name only. most of the time. it's the
                    > time when you are forcefully reminded that you ARE in the army that
                    > cause you to leave in the end.

                    Again, you completely contradict yourself in this paragraph. Your last sentence
                    is exactly my point.

                    > why bother? because coerced people are far less productive then people
                    > who vulonteered or were persuaded to remain. witness the large army
                    > presence at the last technion job fair, for example.

                    This is not quite true. Say a coereced person does 50% work than a person
                    who truely likes the job. So instead of trying to find 10 people to come
                    to your unit, isn't it simpler to just get 20 people in their mandatory
                    service? And isn't it even easier to get 10 people who will come for double
                    the time? Easy, yes. Fair or good for the overall economy, no.

                    > i understand you dont think people should not be _given_ this sort of
                    > choice. do tell me, however, how you can justify the two years of
                    > training a fighter pilot undergoes before he starts being "productive",
                    > if he's only productive for one year and then he is free to leave? he
                    > might choose to stay, but he might also leave. how can the army justify
                    > that option economically?

                    Maybe the case of pilots is somewhat different, and requires an exception.
                    But exceptions should be made only in very rare cases. Currently it is
                    almost a norm to tell new recruits something along the lines of "you can
                    either have a crappy job at the army, or a good job - but all the good
                    jobs need signing more time". I was told this when I enlisted 7 years
                    ago, my younger sister was told this 2 years ago, and they are still saying
                    this. And not only for hightech jobs - just look the the army's latest
                    "kadats" brochure.

                    > i think it can be safely said you had a bad army experience, and i'm
                    > sorry for that. i, on the other hand, learned somethign new every day in

                    You couldn't be more wrong :) Do you know me as someone who complains only
                    about wrongs done to him? Do you think I also wrote that essay about how free
                    software can help poor people because I am a poor person?

                    I had a very non-standard and interesting army service. I wasn't an Atudai.
                    I only spent one month in the actual army, and the rest of the time I was
                    in a non-army body. After two years I became an ordinary civilian, and stayed
                    in that place for 4 more years, out of my own free will and without the
                    horrible green clothes (but did exactly the same important service for our
                    country). I traveled abroad several times during my service. I finished my
                    masters degree during those 6 years (although it was very hard, as I said in
                    a previous post).
                    No, I did not have a bad army experience. But I see other people around me,
                    having a REALLY BAD army experience, just because they were less lucky in the
                    cosmic roll-of-the-dice.

                    > the army, did the things i love with people who shared my passion for
                    > writing code, and accumulated lots of experience. all this, without
                    > signing for one extra minute of keva. i dont doubt many people share

                    This is how it should be. And if you really loved it, you could have stayed
                    there after the 3 years were over (of course, not everyone would stay but
                    if only 25% stayed, it would be enough and they didn't have to force everyone
                    to stay 3 years).

                    > your misgivings about the army, but neither do i doubt many peolpe share
                    > my kind of story. in recent newspaper articles, my unit was called "the
                    > hightech greenhouse of israel". how much of that per-capita income you talk about
                    > is coming from people who, once they leave the army use _the knowledge
                    > they learned in the army_ to make many millions of dollars? (checkpoint
                    > comes to mind here...)

                    Wouldn't they get the same knoweldge by working 3 years in the civilian
                    industry? They would.

                    I'm not saying serving in the army is not important - it certainly is. But
                    there are other important things in life. It is up to the knesset to decide
                    just how important the army is, and put it in its place - not to become
                    more important than it really is. Similarly, the military gets some part of
                    the national budget. Maybe it's 10% and maybe it is 50% - but it is up to
                    the knesset to decide that, and once it is decided the army should be
                    satisfied by what it is getting, and not try to get more using ugly tricks.
                    If the army will benefit by increasing its budget by 10%, it doesn't mean
                    it should be done - there are other considerations too.

                    > how is this the same, nadav? again, consider two equally good
                    > candidates. which one should the army choose for the position? the one
                    > who will bring more use to the army, by staying and doing the job
                    > longer (and because of accumulated experience, better). plain and
                    > simple, dont you agree?

                    Why are you bringing up what the army wants all the time? The army will
                    prefer people to enlist for 10 years. I will prefer to pay them 100 shekels
                    a month, instead of 300, and to call the first 9 years "sherut chova" and
                    only the last year "keva". It will prefer people to sleep in tents rather
                    than build places to sleep. It will prefer to get 90% of the national budget,
                    and not anything less. It will prefer people to do 180 days of miluim every
                    year.
                    But it doesn't matter what it prefers. It should be aware of the costs to
                    the economy of its preferences. And it should retain at least some spark
                    of morality, dignity, fairness, and respect to the human beings that it
                    enlists.

                    And again, I don't think that the choice to stay in the army longer, when
                    made in advance, is really a free choice, or a fair "michraz" between
                    candidates. In this michraz you have one monopoly and many people who are
                    forced to "use your services", which is what makes it fixed and causes so
                    many people to enlist for extra years (6 years is really a lot, but many
                    people I know, not atudaim, did more than 3 years - anything from 3.5 to 5
                    years.)

                    Sorry about all this ranting ;) Nothing is against you Muli, of course - I'm
                    just clearing some anger :) I think we should open a new list,
                    ranting-and-bitching-il for this kind of postings...


                    --
                    Nadav Har'El | Thursday, Jun 7 2001, 16 Sivan 5761
                    nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
                    Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |A smart man always covers his ass. A
                    http://nadav.harel.org.il |wise man just keeps his pants on.
                  • mulix
                    ... allow me to clarify: my unit was fantastic in the _professional_ aspect, but it was still a a part of the army. professionaly it was wonderful, but it was
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:

                      > > actually, the unit i was in was really superb in all of these respects,
                      > > and i still chose to leave once my three years were up. not because of
                      > > my unit, which was incredible (and an excellent preamble to a high
                      > > tech career), but because it was still a part of the army and
                      > > occasionally you were reminded of that in the most unpleasant ways
                      > > you can imagine.
                      >
                      > Read what you write again: read the first line of the above paragraph, and then
                      > the last two lines. Don't you see a contradiction? Many people tell me

                      allow me to clarify: my unit was fantastic in the _professional_ aspect,
                      but it was still a a part of the army. professionaly it was wonderful,
                      but it was still a part of the army and as such, sometimes things
                      sucked. .

                      i agree with you on general army suckiness. i disagree with you on the
                      army's _professional_ suckiness. does that clear up the
                      apparent contradiction?

                      > You couldn't be more wrong :) Do you know me as someone who complains only
                      > about wrongs done to him? Do you think I also wrote that essay about how free
                      > software can help poor people because I am a poor person?

                      i guess i shouldn't have assumed. your email came accross with the sort
                      of tone i associate with strong _personal_ feeelings. i'm glad you
                      didnt suffer too much :)

                      > > the army, did the things i love with people who shared my passion for
                      > > writing code, and accumulated lots of experience. all this, without
                      > > signing for one extra minute of keva. i dont doubt many people share
                      >
                      > This is how it should be. And if you really loved it, you could have stayed
                      > there after the 3 years were over (of course, not everyone would stay but
                      > if only 25% stayed, it would be enough and they didn't have to force everyone
                      > to stay 3 years).

                      the army, or rather my superiors, would have loved for me to stay (and
                      indeed, tried to tempt me in many ways) but i was set on starting the
                      technion as soon as possible. if i was "forced" to stay, it wouldn't
                      have hurt me one bit.

                      > > your misgivings about the army, but neither do i doubt many peolpe share
                      > > my kind of story. in recent newspaper articles, my unit was called "the
                      > > hightech greenhouse of israel". how much of that per-capita income you talk about
                      > > is coming from people who, once they leave the army use _the knowledge
                      > > they learned in the army_ to make many millions of dollars? (checkpoint
                      > > comes to mind here...)
                      >
                      > Wouldn't they get the same knoweldge by working 3 years in the civilian
                      > industry? They would.

                      they would - if they could get in in the first place. how many companies
                      do you know that train _completely unexperienced and unproven_ people
                      and give them this kind of knowledge?

                      > Why are you bringing up what the army wants all the time? The army will

                      because i agree with you that the army should not be all powerfull and
                      omnipotent, should not take too many resources from society. however,
                      the only way for the army to do that is to use whatever resources it
                      does have in the most effective way. and unfortunately, you, and i, and
                      every other 18 year old are _resources_ for the army, to be used in the
                      most effective possible way.

                      you cannot give with one hand and deny with the other. we agree that the
                      army is a necessity, do we not? we agree that it should be as efficient
                      as possible in its usage of resources, do we not, in order to be the
                      least burden for society? well, for the army, just like for any other
                      company, a person _is_ a resource, to be used as effectively is
                      possible. some army units understand nowdays that sometimes that means
                      giving their people good conditions and a good salary and treating them
                      like human beings. one day, i hope, the entire army will realise this
                      and then they wont need to coerce someone into signing 'keva', since
                      they'll be able to compete fair and square for that person. until that
                      happens, the army will use whatever advantage it has. i am NOT saying it
                      is right, but i am saying its justified, _from the army's point of
                      view_.

                      > Sorry about all this ranting ;) Nothing is against you Muli, of course - I'm
                      > just clearing some anger :) I think we should open a new list,
                      > ranting-and-bitching-il for this kind of postings...

                      nothing personal here either, nadav :)

                      but can we get back to hacking now?
                      --
                      mulix
                      http://www.advogato.com/person/mulix

                      linux/reboot.h: #define LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC1 0xfee1dead
                    • Adi Stav
                      ... Actually, the army does not want to receive 90% of the budget, because that would harm economical growth and would reduce the overall budget in the future.
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 03:47:14PM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
                        > Why are you bringing up what the army wants all the time? The army will
                        > prefer people to enlist for 10 years. I will prefer to pay them 100 shekels
                        > a month, instead of 300, and to call the first 9 years "sherut chova" and
                        > only the last year "keva". It will prefer people to sleep in tents rather
                        > than build places to sleep. It will prefer to get 90% of the national budget,
                        > and not anything less. It will prefer people to do 180 days of miluim every
                        > year.

                        Actually, the army does not want to receive 90% of the budget, because
                        that would harm economical growth and would reduce the overall budget in
                        the future. The army has an "econimical planning" unit that does the
                        necessary calculations and estimation to decide what is the optimum amount
                        to request, that would leave the army with as much money as possible both
                        in the present and future.

                        Of course, that supports your point further.
                      • peleg_w@yahoo.com
                        ... determining what ... do in the next ... through a ... And see his ... Would he ... your other ... You do have a point here. I still have a few months to
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In hackers-il@y..., Dan Kenigsberg <danken@c...> wrote:
                          > > I'm currently finishing 11th grade and since I want to get to the
                          > > atuda
                          >
                          > WHY? Maybe you should think again. Remember - not only are you
                          determining what
                          > you are going to do, but also what a 27 years old man is going to
                          do in the next
                          > decade. Are you sure he will want to wear green outfit? Or go
                          through a
                          > bureaucratic ordeal when he wants to go abroad, or see a doctor?
                          And see his
                          > friends having fun in south America while he's doing Katzin Toran?
                          Would he
                          > think of you kindly?
                          >
                          > I'm not saying not to consider it, or apply for it. But check out
                          your other
                          > options before you commit.


                          You do have a point here.
                          I still have a few months to decide if I want to do it, and I'll re-
                          consider it.
                        • peleg_w@yahoo.com
                          ... know, ... CS, is ... I am in 5 points... I had no other choice since I wanted to take Physics and CS.
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jun 7, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In hackers-il@y..., mulix <mulix@a...> wrote:
                            > the technion does not have such a formal requirement, as far as i
                            know,
                            > but since 5 point math get a double bonus (they count as 10 points)
                            > plus a 30% (if i remember correctly) modifier, getting in without 5
                            > points can be almost impossible. the competition, especially for
                            CS, is
                            > fierce :(
                            >
                            > --
                            > mulix
                            > http://www.advogato.com/person/mulix
                            >
                            > linux/reboot.h: #define LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC1 0xfee1dead

                            I am in 5 points... I had no other choice since I wanted to take
                            Physics and CS.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.