473,854 Members | 1,836 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Postdoc position in program development, analysis and transformation


Dear all,

I would like to announce that the department of computer
science of the University of Namur, Belgium, is seeking a
post-doctoral researcher for a one-year fellowship in the area
of

(logic-based) program development, analysis and transformation.
Candidates should not be older than 35 years and hold a PhD in
computer science (or equivalent) acquired within the past five
years at a university outside Belgium.

For more details, please contact Wim Vanhoof (wv*@info.fundp .ac.be)
or visit http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~cri/Pos...cts/index.html
Please note the deadline for application is april 2, 2004.

Kind regards,
Wim Vanhoof.

------------------------------------------------------------
Wim Vanhoof E-mail: wv*@info.fundp. ac.be
University of Namur Tel. ++32(0)81.72.49 .77
Rue Grandgagnage, 21 Fax. ++32(0)81.72.52 .80
B-5000 Namur http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~wva
Belgium


Jul 17 '05
72 7011
>>>>> "AvS" == Anton van Straaten <an***@appsolut ions.com> writes:
AvS> ... Second, there's no legal
AvS> requirement for married couples to have children, so
AvS> childless gay couples should be able to obtain the same
AvS> marital benefits as childless straight couples.

Maybe one ought to question whether those benefits should be there at all.
What are those benefits? The ability to get a tax break when the spouse
is not working? The ability to get insurance through work for the
non-working spouse? Inheritance? Having a say in health matters (as in
pulling the plug)? Husband-wife privilege in court?

I often wonder if the law is making it very advantageous to be married in
some cases and thus making the right to marry attractive. With divorce
rate around 50% (for first marriages, as far as I can tell) maybe people
should be discouraged from marrying? Maybe those benefits (outside of child
rearing stuff) should be available to someone of the person's choosing
regardless of sex and marriage?

Gay love and everything is fine and dandy, but I can't help thinking
all the money and benefits that I missed out on by being a single
person who just happened to be responsible about marriage. Missed out on
them means I funded them in some manner. Why is that injustice not getting
fixed instead of making yet another kind of -- possibly temporary -- union
more attractive?

AvS> Really, you can't argue issues like this on rational grounds. [...]

Indeed. I suspect there's some monetary benefit that people are seeking
the existence of which itself should be questioned in the first place.

cheers,

BM
Jul 17 '05 #41
> This is off-topic in a somewhat bizarre manner, and the relation with any
of the comp.lang.* newsgroups above is really hard to see ("discrimina ted
sums": that's a good one ;-).


.... and saying that I just wanted to make some publicity for a postdoc
position! :-)

For those that seem to question the validity of my original post (see at the
bottom of this mail):
I can assure you that the position *is* available (and that it was *not*
attributed beforehand, as
was suggested by some). Deadline for applications still is April 2nd.

Regarding the age (and other) restrictions that started the whole
discussion; these are imposed
by the institution that provides the funding.

For the record, my *personal* interest is in finding a postdoc. I don't mind
whether this
person is younger or older than 35, has a PhD from a belgian or a
non-belgian university,
is gay or straight, married or not married,... Nor do I mind whether he or
she has an inner
or outer belly button!

Regards,
Wim.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
(apologies for multiple copies)
Dear all,

I would like to announce that the department of computer
science of the University of Namur, Belgium, is seeking a
post-doctoral researcher for a one-year fellowship in the area
of

(logic-based) program development, analysis and transformation.
Candidates should not be older than 35 years and hold a PhD in
computer science (or equivalent) acquired within the past five
years at a university outside Belgium.

For more details, please contact Wim Vanhoof (wv*@info.fundp .ac.be)
or visit http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~cri/Pos...cts/index.html
Please note the deadline for application is april 2, 2004.

Kind regards,
Wim Vanhoof.

------------------------------------------------------------
Wim Vanhoof E-mail: wv*@info.fundp. ac.be
University of Namur Tel. ++32(0)81.72.49 .77
Rue Grandgagnage, 21 Fax. ++32(0)81.72.52 .80
B-5000 Namur http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~wva
Belgium
Jul 17 '05 #42
Marc Spitzer <ms******@opton line.net> writes:
co***@ccs.neu.e du (Richard C. Cobbe) writes:
Marc Spitzer <ms******@opton line.net> writes:
co***@ccs.neu.e du (Richard C. Cobbe) writes:

Marc Spitzer <ms******@opton line.net> writes:

Oh, brother. Here we go again. (I'm going to be awfully glad when this
issue finally goes away, although it'll probably take 30-50 years.) I'm
getting really tired of hearing the same old arguments against same-sex
marriage, especially because I haven't heard one yet that holds up under
scrutiny.

Funny I could say the same thing about pro gay marriage.
Then do. Put your money where your mouth is and explain why our
justifications for asking to be allowed to marry don't hold up. Explain
the overriding interest the state has in preventing us from marrying. The
ability to procreate doesn't cut it; see below.

Please list the arguments and I will be happy to. But could you also
post some links to the studies that show that your dilution of the meaning
of family will not harm this country. For a counter example look at France,
they have a birth rate of about 1.2 children per woman. What this means is
that the population is getting older and they will soon have 1 retired person
per person working. Can you say N++ th republic?
Ok.

- Discrimination against a group of people who are distinguished from the
rest of society, due to a factor that they themselves cannot control,
is wrong. (Social conservatives like to argue that being gay is a
choice, not an innate characteristic. While I won't rule out the
possibility for some folks, most of the gay men I know, including
myself, reject the idea that we chose to be gay.)

- The legalization of same-sex marriage will not affect an existing
straight marriage: both spouses in that marriage will still have
exactly the same rights, privileges, and responsibilitie s as before.

I've seen some folks argue that same-sex marriage will affect existing
straight marriages, in the case where one partner decides that he's
really gay and wants to get married to some guy he's met. I don't buy
this argument: if the husband in a straight marriage comes to the
conclusion that he's gay, the marriage is going to have problems
whether same-sex marriage is legal or not. And legal same-sex
marriages are not necessary to allow a divorce in these circumstances.

- The legalization of same-sex marriage will not make it harder for
straight couples to get married. (It is not, after all, as though we
have a limited number of marriage certificates, available only on a
first-come-first-serve basis.)

- Many gay and lesbian couples want to adopt children. Having the
stability of a legal marriage will make it significantly easier for
those couples to raise their children in a stable home environment.

- Gays and lesbians pay taxes just like everyone else. Therefore we
should be entitled to the same opportunities as everyone else.

- It is not acceptable to say that gay men can marry; they just have to
marry women instead. This is the equivalent of saying that a white man
and a black woman can't get married, even though they have fallen in
love and are building a relationship together, but that's OK, because
he can just go marry some white woman instead.

In your France `counter-example', you have done nothing to indicate that
the aging of the country and the low birth rate has anything to do with
their recent introduction of something approximating Vermont's civil
unions. As a general rule, the higher the standard of living and the level
of education in a country, the lower the birth rate, and France ranks
pretty high in both areas. Nor have you described any reason why this
should lead to the fall of their fifth republic and the introduction of a
new constitution.

For that matter, the US population is also aging, although perhaps not as
badly as France's. That, rather obviously, has *nothing* to do with
same-sex marriage rights, since Vermont's civil unions only became
available as of June 1, 2000, and our population has been aging since the
end of the baby boom, generally reckoned to be in 1965.

To summarize: there aren't any studies that prove that gay marriage will
not cause societal problems. There can't be: there hasn't been gay
marriage to study until roughly the last decade, and that's not long
enough. So any predictions that this will bring about the downfall of our
civilization are purely predictions and therefore not to be trusted.
But the whole purpose of marriage is to have kids from societies POV,
next generation and all that.
<SNIP>
First of all I am talking about groups, not individuals. And as a
class gay marriages can not produce children as a consequence of sex.
As a class straight marriages do so that class gets the protection
because as a class it perpetuates society. And your class does not so
no brass ring.
Last time, and then I'm going to let this issue drop. The claim that
procreation is the sole purpose of marriage *DOES* *NOT* *EXPLAIN* current
practice.

If you want to deal with classes of people, then please explain why
infertile heterosexual couples are grouped in the same class with fertile
heterosexual couples. It's certainly not the case that they can all have
children.

Your class definitions don't fit the rest of your logic.
No, see, I think this law would be wonderful, in the short term, as an
object lesson. Since it would almost certainly prevent many heterosexual
couples from marrying each other, and might possibly annul existing
straight marriages, it would demonstrate to a large number of people that
legally basing marriage on procreation is a bad idea. One would hope that,
after a short time of that sort of thing, the legislature or the people
would come to their senses and strike the law down.


Well you will fuck over anyone you can to get your way, how childish.
And there is a very good chance that the politicians who passed that
law would get shot and they know that. That they would get removed from
office is a given and they know that as well.


First, I'm not actively campaigning for such a law; I'm simply trying to
explain why such a law would be a bad idea. Second, if you really think
that such a law is a bad idea, then what does this do to your claim that
marriage exists only for procreation? The law under discussion would
simply make that enforceable.
And so what you do not as a gay couple bring anything to the table to
justify any special privileges.


We are not asking for special privileges. We are simply asking for the
same privileges, opportunities, and responsibilitie s enjoyed by everyone
else.
Again, sounds plausible, but without evidence, this is just rhetoric. Show
me the history. We've got lots of examples of societies falling apart: the
fall of the Roman Empire, various dynastic changes in China, various
dynastic changes in India, and so on. Surely you should be able to trace
at least *one* of those instances back to excessively rapid social change.


ok Japan after Commodore Perry.


That's a possibility; there's a lot I don't know about Japan in the 1890s
and 1900s. However, to support your argument, you would have to
demonstrate that the society fell apart simply because of rapid changes
forced by Commodore Perry. Further, you would also have to demonstrate
that allowing same-sex marriage represents a large enough change to cause
the deterioration of our society.

Anyway, I think that's enough of this debate. I think it's fairly clear
that I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change my
mind, and there we are.

For those following along at home, my primary aim in this discussion has
*not* been to convince Mr. Spitzer that same-sex marriage is a good thing.
No, my goal has been to demonstrate to those folks who are still trying to
work out how they feel that the arguments made against same-sex marriage
don't hold water. Continuing this discussion would simply make the same
points over and over again.

Therefore, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled programming
language holy wars. Static vs. dynamic typing, anyone? :-)

Richard
Jul 17 '05 #43
Marc Spitzer <ms******@opton line.net> wrote in message news:<86******* *****@bogomips. optonline.net>. ..
Now the court in question in this case told the legislature to come up
with a law we like or else and that is not the courts job.
No, the court told the legislature to come up with a law that is
compatible with the state and national constitutions, and that is
precisely the court's job.
But the whole purpose of marriage is to have kids


Hogwash. *Having* kids is easy -- too easy, and notwithstanding the
situation in France, people generally don't need any encouragement to
reproduce.

The hard part, the part that requires societal support, is not having
the kids but *raising* them. That's the process that the institution
of marriage is designed to support, not the biological act of
reproduction. That's why marriage is supposed to be a long-term
commitment. If the purpose of marriage were just to *have* kids
people would be getting married for nine months at a time, and we'd be
celebrating teen pregnancy and single motherhood. It's all about
raising kids, not producing them, and in that regard gays are just as
capable as anyone else (more if my gay friends are any guide).

The idea that gay marriage ought to be banned because society has a
vested interest in producing babies is absurd on its face. If it were
true, the very same argument could be used to ban the marriage of
sterile people (who as a class cannot produce babies), post-menopausal
women (who as a class cannot produce babies). It could also be used
to argue that lesbians should be allowed to marry because they as a
class can (and do) produce babies. The premise that the mere
production of babies is axiomatically a good thing leads to all sorts
of other bizzarre conclusions, like that all birth control should be
banned, and that rape is a good thing as long as it results in
pregnancy.

Finally, I can't help but wonder how many Americans who oppose gay
marriage on the grounds that we are facing an imminent shortage of
babies also support stricter enforcement of our immigration laws. I
don't have any data, but I suspect the correlation is high, because
the mindset that is required to argue against gay marriage is exactly
the same as the one you need to argue against interracial marriage.
Both positions are simply untenable on any grounds other than pure
bigotry.

Erann Gat
ga*@flownet.com
Jul 17 '05 #44
Thomas A. Russ <ta*@sevak.isi. edu> wrote:
+---------------
| US courts have recently ruled that the US age discrimination laws only
| prohibit discrimination against older workers. They do nothing to
| protect younger workers.
+---------------

And they do nothing to protect older workers if they coincidentally
happen to make more than younger workers. A recent (well, a year or
two ago) federal court decision ruled that a company *can* lay off
employees based on the salary they're making, as in, "O.k., people,
everybody in this division with a position lower than Director who
is making over $90K/year is outta here!" And if it just so happens
that the vast majority of the targeted group making over that trigger
amount are "older" workers? Well, tough. It's legal.
-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock <rp**@rpw3.or g>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607

Jul 17 '05 #45
(this post just an excuse to dump some interesting links on you, that
I've stumbled accross in the last couple of days. it doesn't get much
more off topic than this; I'm off topic and already off topic discussion)
Anyway, I think that's enough of this debate. I think it's
fairly clear that I'm not going to change your mind, and you're
not going to change my mind, and there we are.
You can't argue these things; for some reason, otherwise sane people
decide that they must stick sticks into people who wear towels on their
heads (because for some reason that gets in the way of the first group's
be-nice-to-each-other credo). Similarly, the fact that some woman in
texas doesn't use recreational chemicals is somehow justification for
incarcerating 10-15 % of black males [1] in some states. I guess the
point I'm trying to make is that if you approach this as a rational
discussion, you've already lost. You're either open minded or not.

[1] http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/race/

Personally, I'm tempted by biblical marriage, but that's just because
they've promised me virgins, polygamy, AND concubines [2] (unclear
whether the concubines were virgins, tho). However, if they don't
deliver the virgins soon, I'll be switching sides.

[2] http://www.thecommongood.org/CGN/3_3...lmarriage.html
ok Japan after Commodore Perry.


The MIT open courseware project has a fascinating [3] (but annoyingly
image heavy---accessibility advocates abandon hope ye who enter) website
on how japanese and western artists painted the same events.

[3] http://blackshipsandsamurai.com/
Therefore, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled programming
language holy wars. Static vs. dynamic typing, anyone? :-)


Kill! Burn the unbeliever!
Jul 17 '05 #46
Johan <jo******@SPAM. ccs.neu.PLEASE. edu> writes:
> Anyway, I think that's enough of this debate. I think it's
> fairly clear that I'm not going to change your mind, and you're
> not going to change my mind, and there we are.


You can't argue these things; for some reason, otherwise sane people
decide that they must stick sticks into people who wear towels on their
heads (because for some reason that gets in the way of the first group's
be-nice-to-each-other credo). I guess the point I'm trying to make is
that if you approach this as a rational discussion, you've already lost.
You're either open minded or not.


Yes. That's exactly what I'm trying to demonstrate here. If we can show
more people that the anti-same-sex-marriage folks are motivated primarily
by hatred, fear, and intolerance, then it becomes that much harder to pass
laws that deny us basic civil rights. In other words, give the anti-gay
folks just enough rope to hang themselves.

Richard
Jul 17 '05 #47
co***@ccs.neu.e du (Richard C. Cobbe) wrote in message news:<t2******* ******@denali.c cs.neu.edu>...

[...]

Maybe Marc indeed gave poor arguments against gay marrage, but at
least his arguments weren't religious. Some here were just trying to
misrepresent his opinion.

Here's my $0.02. Any ambiguity in the law should be amended (if there
is any). Some laws in some jurisdictions give homosexuals equal rights
(for different or ambiguous meanings of "equal"). The laws have to be
followed (without laws we have anarchy). However, what you are saying
here goes far beyond the legal argument. You are suggesting that
homosexual sex is somehow very moral and natural, and needs to be sort
of encouraged by the state by giving homosexual relationships legal
status.
Jul 17 '05 #48
David Fisher wrote:
co***@ccs.neu.e du (Richard C. Cobbe) wrote in message
news:<t2******* ******@denali.c cs.neu.edu>...

[...]

Maybe Marc indeed gave poor arguments against gay marrage, but at
least his arguments weren't religious. Some here were just trying to
misrepresent his opinion.
I must not have been paying attention. Can you please quote where this
mis-attribution was made?
You are suggesting that homosexual sex is somehow very moral and
natural, and needs to be sort of encouraged by the state by giving
homosexual relationships legal status.


Fundamentally, society either disallows something, or condones it. Our
laws are not about encouraging anything (appart from not breaking laws),
they are about prohibiting illegal things. In effect, anything not
specifically prohibited is explicitly condoned. This is part of the
fundamental rights that we take as inalienable, and I think a good thing.

Now, whether one thing or anther should be prohibited is another debate
(which we appear to have already had, ad-exhaustion) altogether.
Jul 17 '05 #49
Johan wrote:
{stuff deleted}
Our
laws are not about encouraging anything (appart from not breaking laws),
they are about prohibiting illegal things.

{stuff deleted}

Have you looked at the tax code recently? There are tax laws written to
encourage home ownership, sending the kids to college and all other sorts of
economic tax incentives to encourage behavior that the government feels is
advantageous.

BTW the legal system and our laws need not be logically consistent. They
fundamentally reflect the values of the society however logically
inconsistent societies view points are.
Jul 17 '05 #50

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

12
2075
by: Aaron Watters | last post by:
I'm doing a heart/lung bypass procedure on a largish Python program at the moment and it prompted the thought that the methodology I'm using would be absolutely impossible with a more "type safe" environment like C++, C#, java, ML etcetera. Basically I'm ripping apart the organs and sewing them back together, testing all the while and the majority of the program at the moment makes no sense in a type safe world... Nevertheless, since...
22
3624
by: edgrsprj | last post by:
PROPOSED EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING COMPUTER PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT EFFORT Posted July 11, 2005 My main earthquake forecasting Web page is: http://www.freewebz.com/eq-forecasting/Data.html Newsgroup Readers: If you circulate copies of this report to groups of computer programmers at different universities etc. around the world then they might find the subject matter to be interesting.
1
1474
by: cablespeed | last post by:
We currently are looking to fill two positions for our client (a large MNC) in Lancaster PA. Please reply ASAP to careers@techneers.com Here is the position description: Principal Responsibilities o Analyze requirements from primary stakeholders
5
1287
by: abhi | last post by:
Hello, My name is Abhilash and I am recruiting for an experienced Bioinformatics Programmer. This opportunity is permanent, full-time, and on site in Bethesda/Rockville, MD. The opportunity is with a team that has been tasked with providing scientific computing support for national and international research and development projects in Bioinformatics, Genomics, and Proteomics. Our clients produce some of the largest and most rapidly...
0
9901
marktang
by: marktang | last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look ! Part I. Meaning of...
0
9752
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
0
11031
Oralloy
by: Oralloy | last post by:
Hello folks, I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>". The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed. This is as boiled down as I can make it. Here is my compilation command: g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp Here is the code in...
0
10684
jinu1996
by: jinu1996 | last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth. The Art of Business Website Design Your website is...
0
9517
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
1
7918
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules. He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms. Adolph will...
0
7082
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
5942
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
4563
by: 6302768590 | last post by:
Hai team i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.