Slashdot Mirror

Also, that link contains a PDF on this issue, I am going to quote the relevant bit:
http://helios.hampshire.edu/~sahCS/Hameed-Science-Creationism.pdf

Teaching of Evolution

Although the survey results may point to a dire situation, the reality on the ground is more complicated. Evolutionary biology is included in the high-school curricula of many Muslim countries. In fact, science foundations of 14 Muslim countries, including Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Indonesia, and Egypt, recently signed a statement by the Interacademy Panel (IAP, a global network of science academies), in support of the teaching of evolution, including human evolution. In general, however, biology (as is true for all other subjects) is often taught in a highly religious environment.

For example, in Pakistan, where there is no separation of state and religion, the goal of the national biology curriculum for grades 9 to 12 is to “enable the students to appreciate that Allah is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe”, and the textbooks include the relevant Koranic verses on the origin and creation of life. Biology textbooks in Pakistan contain a chapter on evolution, and evolutionary theory is presented as a fact of science. Nevertheless, the epigraph for the evolution chapter in the 12th grade biology textbook is the Koranic verse, “And He is Who had produced you from a
single being” (6:98). Apart from this epigraph, there are no religious references about creation or evolution in the remaining chapter or in suggested questions at the end. Although evolutionary theory is presented as a fact, the IAP statement notwithstanding, human evolution is missing from these textbooks. The follow-up chapters to evolution, instead, emphasize the practical aspects of biology such as health, environment, and biotechnology.

Asghar and Alters recently interviewed 18 science schoolteachersin Pakistani schools located in Karachi and Lahore and
found that all favored using religious explanations about the creation of life, but most presented both scientific and religious perspectives while teaching biological evolution. Most (14 out of 18) accepted, or at least held as possible, the evolution of organisms; but at the same time, 15 out of 18 rejected human evolution. All agreed that there is no contradiction between Islam and science.

Also, relevant, that in Uni (biology majors, doctors etc), where this matters, every one studies evolution without fuss. No one gives a damn, frankly.

Personally, I think that, as long as a physicist uses and teaches g=9.8N (or whatever the hell it was, I had a horrible phy teacher, never made me like that subject), I couldn't give a hoot whether he doesn't believe the *theory* of gravity. Same for evolution.

"C. Th. SÃrensen, a Danish landscape architect, noticed that children preferred to play everywhere but in the playgrounds that he built. In 1931, he imagined "A junk playground in which children could create and shape, dream and imagine a reality." Why not give children in the city the same chances for play as those in the country? His initial ideas started the adventure playground movement.

The first adventure playground opened in Emdrup, Denmark in 1943, during World War II. In 1946, Lady Allen of Hurtwood visited Emdrup from England and was impressed with "junk playgrounds." She brought the idea to London. These "junk playgrounds" became known as "adventure playgrounds." "
http://adventureplaygrounds.hampshire.edu/history.html

"The Adventure Playground at the Berkeley Marina was opened 31 years ago in 1979. It is a wonderfully unique outdoor facility where staff encourage children to play and build creatively. Come climb on the many unusual kid designed and built forts, boats, and towers. Ride the zip line or hammer, saw, and paint. By providing these low risk activities Adventure Playground creates opportunities for children to learn cooperation, meet physical challenges and gain self confidence. Pictures of a fort building project. The concept for Adventure Playgrounds originated in Europe after World War II, where a playground designer studied children playing in the "normal" asphalt and cement playgrounds. He found that they preferred playing in dirt and lumber from the post war rubble. He realized that children had the most fun designing and building their own equipment and manipulating their environment. The formula for Adventure Playgrounds includes Earth, fire, water, and lots of creative materials."
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/contentdisplay.aspx?id=8656

And here's a song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQtwb3lQ_c0

Gestures will do the trick instead: StrokeIt for Windows and xGestures for Mac.

I'm confused. Why are we discussing depictions of education in Star Trek as though they actually indicate anything?

I used it as a single example and people replied. I guess I struck a nerve. The point is that imaginative fiction like Star Trek speculates wildly on all sorts of aspects of human civilization. Star Trek in particular isn't about what the future is going to be like, but about issues current since the 60's. They speculate on all sorts of transformative technology like universal translators, subspace communicators, transporters and on and on - and yet from the original series up through the recent movie they never considered any style of education aside from the academy. For instance, why not create a school on the holodeck? One answer might be that all the creative individuals associated with Star Trek over the years recognize that students benefit from actual human contact.

Regarding the rest of your comments, there are increasingly more alternative college options, e.g.: http://www.evergreen.edu/, http://www.pitzer.edu/ or http://hampshire.edu/ There's nothing wrong with appropriate use of technology, but one has reason to be skeptical of corporate motivations when discussing the future of educational institutions.

I'm happy with 2 buttons and a gesture utility (StrokeIt for Windows, xGestures for Mac OS X) especially when combined with a macro utility (QuicKeys for Mac OS X).

This was recently discussed at a forum I moderate; a user put in a request that we create a new 'sarcasm smiley' when several good alternatives already exist. While some members pointed out we already had a very good sarcastic looking emoticon, others put forward this screencap from the animated zelda cartoon:
http://alum.hampshire.edu/~bjk02/princess/link1.jpg

The thread then disentegrated into posting comic book man and nelson from the Simpsons, concluding with the obivous 'guys, just use the fake html/bbcode [/sarcasm]'.

Besides, tildes are for flirting~~~~

http://stout.hampshire.edu/~bjk02/princess/

I wondered if the amount of time I overslept was correlated with the length of time I was trying to sleep for. As part of my senior thesis (Hampshire College Div 3, actually) on behavior modification through quantitative feedback, I started tracking

• time I went to bed
• time I set the alarm for, and
• time I actually woke up.

After about a month of data had accumulated, I plotted the "planned sleep duration" (alarm time - bed time) vs. "snooze duration" (wake time - alarm time) on a graph with a trend line. Surprisingly enough, it suggested that I tended to sleep about 8 hours, regardless of how optimistic I was feeling when I set the alarm! The average total sleep time (wake time - bed time) was about 8 hrs.

Also, the trend line intersects the X-axis (no snooze time) at about 8 hrs of planned sleep time, suggesting that if I allowed myself a full night of sleep, I wouldn't use the snooze button at all. I was in college, of course, so that was out of the question; note the data point where 2 hrs of planned sleep results in 6 hrs of snooze time!

As for my theory about behavior modification, it was anecdotally supported by a brief modification of my sleep habits, then a reversion to my old ways after I stopped tracking the times. Now I have a 2-year-old who jumps on my head at 7 am and says "It's time to drink your coffee, Daddy!"

I wondered if the amount of time I overslept was correlated with the length of time I was trying to sleep for. As part of my senior thesis (Hampshire College Div 3, actually) on behavior modification through quantitative feedback, I started tracking

• time I went to bed
• time I set the alarm for, and
• time I actually woke up.

After about a month of data had accumulated, I plotted the "planned sleep duration" (alarm time - bed time) vs. "snooze duration" (wake time - alarm time) on a graph with a trend line. Surprisingly enough, it suggested that I tended to sleep about 8 hours, regardless of how optimistic I was feeling when I set the alarm! The average total sleep time (wake time - bed time) was about 8 hrs.

Also, the trend line intersects the X-axis (no snooze time) at about 8 hrs of planned sleep time, suggesting that if I allowed myself a full night of sleep, I wouldn't use the snooze button at all. I was in college, of course, so that was out of the question; note the data point where 2 hrs of planned sleep results in 6 hrs of snooze time!

As for my theory about behavior modification, it was anecdotally supported by a brief modification of my sleep habits, then a reversion to my old ways after I stopped tracking the times. Now I have a 2-year-old who jumps on my head at 7 am and says "It's time to drink your coffee, Daddy!"

But, my off the wall idea is similar to the chains on shopping carts.. around here, you insert a quarter, or some places, a #'d tag into a slot, and the lock pops open, they are mainly used to keep carts from flying all over the lot..
--you don't get your quarter back until you put the cart into another cart or other spot with available chains... they don't have to be quarters.

Do these devices have kensington slots? run the cable on the kensington slot (or weld some cables on) and issue unique tokens/keys that are left behind when someone unlocks an item.. something awol? pull the tag and see who's it is.

in my search for examples to include, I also found this potentially applicable site
http://bike.hampshire.edu/development/summary/ about setting up community bikes & security..
skim it, they cover mechanical to electrical to complex tracking.

I don't know much directly about how to assist you in your search for good games. I do know, though, that students involved with the Lemelson Center at Hampshire College would be the perfect folks to contact about working with you towards a solution. The Lemelson Center is focused on Assistive Technology design and fabrication, and the students at Hampshire are a great lot for innovative approaches to situations like yours. Check them out at http://lemelson.hampshire.edu/LCD.html

Good luck to you! I hope to see one of the students there working on your problem soon...

The same thing is happening in western Massachusetts to connect The Five Colleges (Amherst College, Hampshire College, Mount Holyoke, Smith, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst).

If you don't like the licensing terms, then choose Linux. Since that was like kinda of the whole point.

Not many people would find that license too restrictive. Its the BSD licence.

Interestingly enough, Peter Bentley's group results on car racing would not be considered human competitive, unless the results obtained in the simulation will be tried in the real world, or if the simulator is something experts actually use to shave of seconds. In any case, it seems the Evolutionary Computation world is starting to obtain very strong results, for a part due to Moore's law. It's possible that this is caused by the fact that the field simply tries to solve things, instead of first proving that it works (AI/ML), or proving that it doesn't work (Operations Research).

First of all, you must attend college. I would put my little brother in the "non-traditionally bright" category. Very smart kid who almost never got the challenges he needed in high school to really shine and ended up doing a year at comm. college and then dropping out, never (at least yet and it's been 6 years) to return. He drives a truck that picks up low-level hazardous waste now which I think is wasting his talent.

I would suggest that you look at some of the "non-traditional" colleges to help nurture your "non-traditional" intelligence. Schools like Evergreen State, Hampshire (caution, Flash), Antioch and Colorado College among others.

These schools tend to have very flexible curricula, lots of independent projects, small seminar-based classes and DIY major programs. I have friends who have attended all of these schools who I think are much happier and doing much better now (10 years after graduation) than they would have if they'd attended "better" schools with more straightforward lecture/lab/test curricula.

I don't think I would have done particularly well at these places, I like some flexibility but need a fair amount of structure in my learning. If you are the sort of person who just strikes off on your own trying to learn whatever interests you, this may be your best chance.

I just finished a PhD last week and my advice about grad school is that you cross that bridge when you come to it. Maybe it will be exactly what you need, maybe it will be a complete waste of 2-8 years (mine took 5 FWIW). Get yourself a broad, interesting, liberal arts degree first (with a focus on CS or biology or photography or whatever if you want).

My $.02

BFL

That's all well and good, but you do realize that Minix has been able to do all of that for many years, right?

http://minix1.hampshire.edu/

I've been running Minix i86 on my IBM 5150 for years now. Including telnet and httpd daemons.

Suit yourself, Hanzo. Those elite schools will pass you over for avoiding math much quicker than they will looking at your overall GPA. There is a sure-fire way to avoid that C...HARD WORK. If you aren't good in math, rather than dance around it, get some help! Tutoring and other services are usually available at Community Colleges.

According to the admissions, based on whats on their websites and documentation, a Philosophy or Liberal Arts major is not required to take calculus as a prerequisite, so why should I take it if its not required? Would it really boost me up that much ?

There is a sure-fire way to avoid that C...HARD WORK. If you aren't good in math, rather than dance around it, get some help! Tutoring and other services are usually available at Community Colleges.

I cant get tutoring because I dont have a car yet, and I dont live on campus because its community college, so this isnt an option, when I live on campus then I can get tutoring.

Perhaps you might have an undiagnosed learning disability that prevents you from "grokking" math. Again, find out about resources available to you and use them.

A learning disability is an excuse, the reason I dont get math is because math is useless, to actually suggest that someone has a learning disability because they dont get math is like me claiming anyone who cant use Linux or anyone who doesnt understand C must have a learning disability.

It is utterly impossible to get a degree, anywhere, without math. That is, unless you answer one of those many spams for U.N.I.V.E.R.S.I.T.Y D.E.G.R.E.E.S F.A.S.T. You know the ones...the ones you get in the same batch as the Nigerian Scam and "free porn passwords."

Ok, check out some of these sites, look under "philosophy" as the major, and tell me where it says you need to take calculus to get a degree in philosophy.
http://www.bu.edu/
http://www.northeastern.edu/
http://www.bc.edu/
http://www.tufts.edu/
http://www.hampshire.edu/flash/index.php
http://www.amherst.edu/
http://www.umass.edu/

Math is a prerequisite for SCIENCE degrees only. Show me where it says you MUST take math to be accepted into any of these schools for a philosophy degree? At most I'll need to take an a linear algebra class or a pre calculus class, thats it.

One class is all you must pass in order to get a degree, and I can take this class during the summer and get a C, and get my degree. So tell me why you think it would be a good idea to take it now if none of the schools say its a requirement for acceptance?

If the schools DID say its a required class for acceptance into their philosophy program, I'd take the class, but that would delay me from transfering for another semester so I dont see a point, I think instead i will transfer out of community college into one of the 4 year colleges on the list I showed you, and then take the mathclass, when I actually LIVE on campus and no longer have to worry about traveling for over 2 hours to get to school via public transportation.

Hard work can avoid a C? Actually no it cant, it depends on how good you are at what you are doing. You can work hard and get a C, or you can breeze through a class and get an A, if you are doing something you never were taught in highschool, such as say a student who comes from another country and decided to take a college level english class, theres no way in hell they'd get an A, because they never learned English before, math is the same way, its unrealistic for me to believe I can make up for 12 years of not being taught something, simply by cramming 12 years of work into one semester.

Sure I can pass with a C, but I dont think I'd truely underst

While AST's page would still probably be considered "official" he hasn't really been involved with Minix development for some time. Al Woodhull and Kees Bot are the flag bearers for Minix now. Any real news or updates for Minix are usually found at http://minix1.hampshire.edu/. FWIW, this host actually runs an httpd on Minix.

Al Woodhull's Minux box is still alive, well, and running here, in the third floor of Cole Science center at Hampshire College, in Amherst, MA. Al Woodhull is the co-author of the Minix operating system, and I believe that he still helps maintain it (occasionally).

The fact that it is still up and running an Apache server is a testament that it is still a functional operating system...more than just an educational toy. Here is a quote from the site:

To the best of our knowledge, minix1.hampshire.edu is the oldest web site based upon standard Minix. The site actually began operation in April 1994, offering anonymous ftp access using Michael Temari's Tnet system on Minix 1.5 on an 80286 system. In February 1996 the web site was added to the site, then operating under Minix 1.7.0 on an 80386. The mirror site at turing.oit.umass.edu was added in 1998, and changed its name to minix1.bio.umass.edu in October 2001.

So what if XF86 isn't being written for it? Does X make it a real OS? Is an OS not functional without X11R6? Does that make all of those X-less servers that I built and maintain toys?

--Turkey

Al Woodhull's Minux box is still alive, well, and running here, in the third floor of Cole Science center at Hampshire College, in Amherst, MA. Al Woodhull is the co-author of the Minix operating system, and I believe that he still helps maintain it (occasionally).

The fact that it is still up and running an Apache server is a testament that it is still a functional operating system...more than just an educational toy. Here is a quote from the site:

To the best of our knowledge, minix1.hampshire.edu is the oldest web site based upon standard Minix. The site actually began operation in April 1994, offering anonymous ftp access using Michael Temari's Tnet system on Minix 1.5 on an 80286 system. In February 1996 the web site was added to the site, then operating under Minix 1.7.0 on an 80386. The mirror site at turing.oit.umass.edu was added in 1998, and changed its name to minix1.bio.umass.edu in October 2001.

So what if XF86 isn't being written for it? Does X make it a real OS? Is an OS not functional without X11R6? Does that make all of those X-less servers that I built and maintain toys?

--Turkey

Back in the 80's somebody wrote a program to act like a rosiarian psychologist. Someone else wrote a program to act like a paranoid patient.

I don't understand your motives.

WHY DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND MY MOTIVES?

Shouldn't I be?

WHY DID YOU SAY THAT JUST NOW?

That's just the way it is.

SUPPOSE THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT WERE NOT.

So?

I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOU FULLY.

You harp on the same questions too much.

WHAT DOES THAT SIMILARITY SUGGEST TO YOU?

I don't get you.

DO YOU WISH THAT YOU DID GET I?

What I'm saying is that these extremists want us dead and our society destroyed. And there is absolutely nothing we can peacefully do, politically or otherwise, to change that. There is no reasoning with these extremists because their end goal is the complete and utter destruction of our (re: most average Americans') way of life.

Oh, and as far as military action in the Middle East for centuries goes...don't forget war amongst the tribes, fueding warlords, etc, etc. It ins't just the West that's been fighting there.

If there were effective alternatives to forcefully protecting ourselves, then I'd love to hear them.

And just what is the West trying to accomplish in Afghanistan?

• whatreallyhappened.com
• WAR ON TERROR: THE REAL VICTIMS
• Boom, Bust and Echo: A Dark Theory Behind Black Tuesday (This one is a little over the top, but there is some interesting information)
• Asking "Why?"
• Explaining Arab anger
• They can't see why they are hated
• Who did it? Foreign Report presents an alternative view
• When Will We Learn?
• Why we should reject American propaganda
• emperors-clothes.com
• zmag.org, see especially:
  • The New War Against Terror

But, you can make it clear to other nations that a given government will not be allowed to exist if said government either turns a blind eye to terrorists operating in its borders or, even worse, endorses and supports terrorists.

For example, an english lit major needs to complete a science requirement. He or she can do this by taking classes, or by an independent project - like making a website about shakespeare, or something totally non-related, like genetically modifying mealworms. It's all up to you, and whatever faculty member you choose to work with.

Granted, this is isn't the best possible system, and many people hate it, but it works very well for people, like the poster, who know exactly what they want to do and want to explore it further. I know a few people who did social science projects by researching the benefits of open-source for non-profit groups, or the "digital divide" - bringing IT to inner-city youth.

Ok, so it doesn't really help you, but it's an alternative system that has some great advantages.

-Milinar

Well, how about that. My little 5150 is 20! I'll hafta go get a cake or something.

Of course it's still in the basement, ressurected a few years ago by Minix 2.0.2. Imagine, a (somewhat) complete Unixoid, open-source system crammed into 640K. It even runs httpd! I love reusing old hardware...

Suppose you have a bomb with a trigger on its tip, so sensitive that a single photon hitting it will make it explode. Suppose further that you have some good bombs and some duds with stuck triggers that don't move. Can you tell which bombs are good and which aren't? Well sure, just hit it with a photon and see if it blows up. But can you do it without blowing up the bomb? Yes! (Well, probabilistically yes.)

Here's how it works: shoot a laser beam through a beamsplitter, bounce the two beams off of mirrors (one of which is attached to the trigger of a bomb) which redirect the beams back into another beamsplitter, with detectors on the other side. You won't understand the setup without looking at the picture -- I will be referring to it.

A laser beam is a coherent superposition of a bunch of photons. What happens if you turn the intensity down so much that you're getting single photons out? When the photon reaches the first beamsplitter, you might think that the photon either goes one way or the other. But quantum mechanics says that the photon enters a superposition state in which there is a 50% probability that it took the upper path and a 50% probability that took the lower path -- you won't know until you collapse the wavefunction by measuring which path it went through (by putting a detector along the path or something). (I'm being vague here: it's not that it went one way but you don't know until you measure it; rather, "which way it went" is simply undefined until you measure it, and if you don't measure it then it's never defined.)

So anyway, the photon hits the first beamsplitter and enters a superposition. If the bomb is a dud (fixed mirror), then this is an ordinary interferometer. At the second beamsplitter, the two beam wavefunctions (representing a single photon) interfere with themselves to produce a state with 100% probability of being detected at B and 0% probability of being detected at A. (You can see this from symmetry: the beam enters the system horizontally and has to come out horizontally too since the apparatus is symmetric.) This is precisely what you would expect classically with wave interference, by the way. Nothing too odd.

However, suppose that the bomb isn't a dud. Then the the impact of a photon on the mirror is free to move the trigger and set off the bomb, so the bomb serves as a measuring device! If it a photon hits it, the bomb will explode, so you have definitely measured that the photon took the lower path. What happens here? Like I said, there's a 50% probability that a measuring device (such as the bomb) inserted into the lower beam will measure a photon. If that happens, the bomb will explode. But what if the photon is measured to not take that path (by virtue of the bomb not exploding)? Then with 100% probability it took the upper path. When it hits the second beamsplitter, it's just as if it hit the first beamsplitter, since there's no interference from the other beam -- we know that nothing went that way. So with 50% probability it goes to detector A, and with 50% it goes to detector B.

The upshot: if the bomb is a dud, then you will get a photon at B with 100% probability. If the bomb is good, then you get an explosion with 50% probability, a photon at A with 25% probability, and a photon at B with 25% probability.

The point: if you get any photons at A, then you know for sure that the bomb was good. But you didn't actually ever send a photon to the bomb to find out! This is a "counterfactual" -- you are obtaining information about something that never happened (a photon hitting the bomb), but could have!!

Of course, you don't have an infallible scheme. Half the time you have a good bomb your test blows it up, and half the time it doesn't you can't tell whether it was good or not (because you got a photon at B). But 25% of the good bombs are provably good (without blowing them up). It turns out you can cascade this process to make the probability of detecting a good bomb as high as you want.

This effect is known as "quantum non-demolition" and has been experimentally verified (not with real bombs of course). You can use it to measure things using photons without destroying the photons (normally a photon is destroyed whenever it interacts with something -- it is absorbed).

Professor Lee Spector at Hampshire College is currently teaching a course in Quantum Computing for undergraduates entitled Quantum Computing with No Prerequsites of any kind.

Professor Lee Spector at Hampshire College is currently teaching a course in Quantum Computing for undergraduates entitled Quantum Computing with No Prerequsites of any kind.

Some educators believe reducing assessment increases motivation and learning. (e.g. Pirsig mentioned that in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance).

Not to mention several top U.S. colleges where they've been living the dream for decades, either doing away with grades entirely or removing them as a publicly available motivating factor: Hampshire College, University of California-Santa Cruz, St. John's College, and others.