Slashdot Mirror


Bill Gates Enrolls His Kids In Khan Academy

theodp writes "At some schools, a teaching load of five courses every academic year is considered excessive. But Sal Khan, as an earlier Slashdot post noted, manages to deliver his mini-lectures an average of 70,000 times a day. BusinessWeek reports that Khan Academy has a new fan in Bill Gates, who's been singing and tweeting the praises of the free-as-in-beer website. 'This guy is amazing,' Gates wrote. 'It is awesome how much he has done with very little in the way of resources.' Gates and his 11-year-old son have been soaking up videos, from algebra to biology. And at the Aspen Ideas Festival in front of 2,000 people, Gates gave Khan a shout-out, touting the 'unbelievable' Khan Academy tutorials that 'I've been using with my kids.'"

38 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. khaaan by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Funny

    KHAAAAAAAAAAAAN.

    What do you get if you cross God Father and an economist?

    An offer you can't understand

    I have nothing else :(

    1. Re:khaaan by Joebert · · Score: 5, Funny

      If all of "your material" is constantly getting "taken early", you're not a comedian, you're a clown. Or Carlos Mencia.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:khaaan by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      All your material are belong to us.

  2. Gates Foundation by sourcerror · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would cool, if the Gates Foundation donated for Khan Academy, because as far as I know Khan is now burning his savings.

    1. Re:Gates Foundation by gilesjuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It would be nice if Microsoft hadn't been overcharging education establishments for their software for years. Perhaps then they would have had more money to spend on other things.

      All that money Gates and Microsoft have is down to them emptying everyone's pockets for mundane software like Office, adding the Microsoft "tax" to every PC sale and so on. Gates's charity is all about recognition. The best charity is that where the donors are anonymous, that way they have no agenda, they aren't trying to change the way people think about them.

      I'm sure if we all had more money than we could possibly spend we would give it away.

      Plenty of criticism here:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation#Criticism

    2. Re:Gates Foundation by thenextpresident · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The criticisms presented there seem to essentially be criticisms that could be thrown at any charity. None of them registered as problem with the foundation itself. In some of the cases, the only solution to resolve the complaint is to lower or eliminate the amount donated.

      Sorry, but those people complaining are going to complain whatever happens.

      --
      Jason Lotito
    3. Re:Gates Foundation by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The website says that "generous individuals" have donated enough that he can do it full time. Given Gates' well known financial commitments to education it wouldn't surprise me at all if Gates has donated.

      To a lesser extent I guess Google is also donating by hosting the projects infrastructure for free, notably YouTube but also AppEngine and other things.

    4. Re:Gates Foundation by Aquitaine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wow. What an angry, narrow-minded post. 'Insightful' indeed.

      I have no more love for Microsoft than the next guy, but you act like we're all being forced to buy MS products and that every cent they've earned was all but stolen from our pockets, and that, if it weren't stolen from our pockets, we'd be giving all that money to charity ourselves. Yeah, right.

      Gates believes that recognition will drive more people to charity than anonymity. As an un-involved businessman who gives a small piece of his small profit to charity every year, I share your preference for anonymous donations, because the cause (whatever it may be) is certainly more important than the donor. This isn't what Gates is arguing. He's saying that whatever harm comes from the recognition factor, at the end of the day, you'll have an order of magnitude more money coming in from people who want that recognition such that, if the cause is so important, funding it an extra order of magnitude is much more important than our anonymity principle. That's a tough case to argue, because vanity is definitely a big piece of philanthropy, and as much as I think stamping people's names on university buildings or theater/classroom seats is dumb, I'd rather have a theater or a classroom with some stranger's name on everything than not have it.

      Gates' charity is not 'all about recognition,' either. He honestly believes that recognition is an important piece of the cycle; you're free to disagree, but as I imagine that neither you nor I have achievements that even come close to what his charity accomplishes in a single year, I think it's very easy for us to throw stones and paint him as a jerk.

      As it happens, I actually don't completely support a big piece of what his charity does -- focusing on disease in Africa -- but it's foolish and simply wrong to suggest that Gates is just a successful crook rather than an accomplished individual who is free to spend the fruits of his labor as he pleases.

    5. Re:Gates Foundation by Beetle+B. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The criticisms presented there seem to essentially be criticisms that could be thrown at any charity.

      This. Essentially, the criticisms are saying that the money could be better utilized, and not saying that it is doing any damage as it is. Put another way, had Bill Gates never provided the money in the first place (which is his right), nothing would be better. The Foundation isn't making anything in the world worse.

      --
      Beetle B.
    6. Re:Gates Foundation by Aquitaine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was just talking about that subject this morning, as it happens. The argument against fighting disease in Africa basically says that, when you spend hundreds of millions fighting diseases and starvation that kill children in Africa in countries without well-developed, democratic societies, what you get in 20-30 years is a large population of healthy young adults who are still in a country without a developed society, without even a semi-modern economy, and without much modern healthcare outside of what other countries donate. In other words, you have a population that is vastly larger than what the country can economically support, and you don't have jobs for them, so you get a lot of militant young guys whose pasttimes are either making lots of babies or causing problems.

      Now, that's a gross oversimplification of the problem, and I'm actually not sold on it as a reason to say 'bah, let disease kill millions!' as that's a pretty cold stance to take. You'll sometimes hear opponents of this kind of charity point out that disease is Nature's way of controlling population, but you could justify quite a few scary things with that reasoning.

      I do think that the 'feel good about yourself by donating to starving children' drive of the last 60-70 years is shortsighted in this respect, but of course it's much easier to feed even large numbers of starving people than it is to set up a modern government and economy in some of these African countries, assuming even that you have the right to try and do so (which is a big assumption).

      In other words, not unlike Mr. Gates himself, the 'disease and starvation in Africa' subject is a complex one that has a lot more going on than the sound bytes you usually hear. I haven't reached a conclusion on Africa because most of the conversation about it goes like this:

      Feels Good Guy: I just gave $1,000 to charity and saved the lives of 100 kids in Africa!
      Skeptical Guy: What about their education? Their future health care? Do they have a chance at being self-sufficient later or will they simply need even more external support as they get older?
      Feels Good Guy: Racist!

      Anyway, that's what's (potentially) wrong with it. I tried to paint a pretty neutral picture because I really do want to hear more actual conversation on the subject rather than the knee-jerk stuff that's out there.

    7. Re:Gates Foundation by sourcerror · · Score: 5, Informative

      I tell you one example when the schools didn't have choice:
      Hungarian government seals a 25 billion HUF deal with Microsoft. That includes both academic and government licenses. The universities had no say whether how would they prefer to spend the money spent in their name.

    8. Re:Gates Foundation by KingMotley · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Microsoft often donated the software FREE to academic facilities, and when it wasn't totally free, they got huge discounts often paying 1/6th (or less) of the normal price. Somehow I fail to see how this is "overcharging" unless you take the view that all software should be completely free. I guess $10 for an office sweet is "overcharging" if you see things that way.

      I'm starting a revolution, I call it "lawn care should be free", or "open source lawncare". Perhaps you wouldn't mind coming over to my house and cutting my lawn for free. You obviously don't have a wife/girlfriend let alone a family to feed. Once you are done cutting my lawn and trimming my bushes, please GET OFF MY LAWN.

    9. Re:Gates Foundation by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But given that the Gates Foundation spends money on third world development as well, that seems to mostly satisfy that reservation of yours.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation

      Of course the foundation and every other charity can do little about the politics of some countries. But letting people needlessly die because they are in a country which currently has a bad government is not really on. Besides citizens of those countries will not concern themselves with fixing their politics whilst they are still concerned with basic survival. See:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

    10. Re:Gates Foundation by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes. And I have a choice to buy elsewhere or build my own. As it happens, that's exactly what I do.

      Good for you.

      I go to a public university. As part of my computer science degree, I get a "free" -- that is, paid through via either tuition or tax dollars -- copy of several versions of Windows, Visual Studio, and about a dozen other random Microsoft products. In addition, there are dozens of computer labs around campus which are available to me for "free", meaning whether or not I use them, I'm paying for them one way or another.

      So you see, it doesn't matter that my laptop came with Ubuntu preinstalled. I still have to pay for Windows, one way or another. Even if I went to another university, my tax dollars would still end up here.

      Now, I don't have a huge problem with this, as there are likely hundreds, if not thousands, of random deals the university makes with outside vendors to give me free shit. I'm sitting here with a "free" water bottle that I got just for moving into the dorms.

      But even you aren't pretending you can avoid Microsoft:

      My business buys some MS products that my business uses (like SQL Server and Windows Server) and very cheaply at that.

      Yep.

      Nobody forced us to do this and we could switch to an open-source alternative if we wanted to (and we have a few reasons why we might one day, but not yet).

      I'm betting the "not yet" reasons are significant, or you'd already have switched.

      How many products does MS make? You want to get rid of every single one of them because they got convicted of bundling browsers and Windows pre-installation schemes?

      I would, actually. It would send a powerful message -- when the head of your company is corrupt, you get fucked. If you don't want all your eggs in one basket that way, don't make a single gigantic corporation -- because it takes a gigantic corporation to make truly gigantic fuck-ups that even the government can't control.

      It won't happen, of course. If the government won't do it to BP, I can't imagine they would do it to Microsoft.

      How many businesses and consumers that depend on MS (out of their choice!) would be screwed out of a livelihood

      When your livelihood is that tightly tied to a single vendor, you're in a dangerous situation anyway. I know -- I worked for a startup which lost everything that way.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  3. attention to the polarised by FuckingNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He's the rich founder of MS, yet he's an awesome philanthropist and geek father keen to educate his kids properly.

    You have stuff to learn from this guy.

    1. Re:attention to the polarised by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "He's an overflowing cup filled with the very cream of human goodness. In all the time I've known him he's never done anything immoral." - Hanover Fiste

    2. Re:attention to the polarised by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:attention to the polarised by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No it doesn't. He started giving money away because his dad yelled at him about not giving anything back. William Gates Sr has been well known around Seattle for a long time. And one of the things he's known for is his generosity and more recently his push for an income tax on only high earners to compensate the state for the relative free ride that those individuals get under the current sales tax system.

    4. Re:attention to the polarised by FuckingNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, what's happening here is that someone with a lot of capital is investing it to increase the amount of money available. This is what almost all well-funded foundations do. It would be, you hopefully realise, fucking stupid to either stuff the money under the mattress or give it all away immediately.

      Now, such investments will almost certainly in some ways trickle down to operations which are harmful to some people in some way. Every cent you have in a bank or other investment account is doing a similar thing. It is perfectly legitimate to call a foundation up on this in the hope that you can encourage them to make investments you consider more ethically sound, but it doesn't imply some sort of plot to exploit / harm the ones you're helping.

      In Gates' specific case he's tried to stop the investment side from interfering with the giving side and vice versa to prevent conflicts of interest. The inevitable result is that sometimes an investment will appear in some indirect way to harm a charitable effort. Perhaps you can argue that each side should keep a closer eye on what the other is doing.

    5. Re:attention to the polarised by FuckingNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if his giving today is completely the result of his dad persuading him, what exactly is wrong with that? Are you saying that goodness is only goodness if the decision to be good is made in a vacuum?

      "Yeah, he saved my life, but he only saved my life because last Thursday his grandmother encouraged him to attend a First Aid course." The guy still considered the options and made the final decision to attend the course / give away the money. He didn't have to.

    6. Re:attention to the polarised by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's wrong with being invested into "big pharma"?

      The Gates Foundation will not provide immunizations for nations which do not provide strong patent protection for pharmaceutical companies. This is not necessary for immunizing the developing world. This is a clear conflict of interest when coupled with Gates' personal investments, to say nothing of those of the foundation itself.

      Hate "big oil"? Stop driving your car.

      I drive as little as possible, I've changed my vehicles for more fuel-efficient turbo-diesels, and I've amassed some oil and a biodiesel processor. As soon as I work out a way to get the 55 gallon drum of methanol to my house I'm going to make a whole bunch of biodiesel.

      Hate "big government"? Stop putting your hand out to take their give aways.

      Indeed, I wish they would stop trying to give me so much. Then they would stop taking so much, and then I could afford to do as you say. But of course, the system was designed to be self-perpetuating.

      0

      Hate "big media"? Put out your own free media so that people have an alternative.

      Plenty of people are doing that, for the average person it is enough to consume such media and support the artists.

      Stop demanding that others change, change yourself.

      Oh, the irony. Keep your hypocrisy to yourself. Log in so I can foe you.

      Invest yourself into systems you think are corrupt and change them yourself.

      Fighting the system from within is a sad joke. The answer is to put your energy into another system.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. Education... by mayberry42 · · Score: 5, Funny

    you Khan believe in!

    1. Re:Education... by xtracto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Can you elaborate on that?

      I am a scientist (PhD in Comp. Sci., currently working in an EU project along with around other 20 scientists and their PhD students) and do not see any issue with the Kahn material.

      Basically, because he is not claiming any new scientific achievement but just explaining currently known and proven facts and processes in a way which is easy to understand to the majority of people.

      Hence, he does not need any "scientific method" to impart such knowledge.

      So I reiterate, can you please elaborate what is wrong with his approach?

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  5. I love LaTeX, but really, now by Mathinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > started using LaTeX, which is older but vastly superior to Word

    I love LaTeX, it produces beautifully typeset math, but for your average biologist, English professor, etc., I can see that something a bit less high-powered and easier to use ("what you see is approximately what you get") would be more optimal.

    In other words, it's not chance that many academics don't use LaTeX.

    1. Re:I love LaTeX, but really, now by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Informative

      TeX and LaTeX produce the most beautiful documents I've ever seen off a computer. If you're googling for them, be sure to include "document preparation system" in your keywords, though. Otherwise you'll have to wash your brain.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:I love LaTeX, but really, now by Jezza · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Err, nonsense. This is a tool you use everyday right? How long did it take to learn to use a pencil? OK so there is a bit of "upfront" learning, then you can write documents everywhere you can find an editor, and seldom think about formatting. Yet your documents look fantastic (or sh!t if you've got no taste).

      How many Microsoft Word users actually use Styles? (Fewer than you think) How many understand Sections? (Fewer than you think) How many actually understand tab stops and how to use them (I mean the different kinds)? (Fewer than you think)

      So you either have a tool that when you don't know how to use it, you're totally aware you don't know how to use it, or a tool that most people think they know how to use even though they don't have a clue.

      Now what's optimal?

  6. Think about it by giltwist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thirty years ago, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) released a controversial document entitled An Agenda for Action. Part of what made the position statement so controversial was the recommendation that computers and calculators should be a part of every mathematics classroom (http://www.nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=17282). Many teachers and parents feared that students might never learn mathematics properly if they could just press a few buttons to produce a correct answer. In stark contrast, the schoolchildren of the YouTube generation are virtually inseparable from their portable electronics - many of which are more powerful than early graphing calculators that NCTM. Dubbed digital natives (http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky - Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants - Part1.pdf), none among them were alive during a time when there was no Internet. As a result, the question is no longer “if” technology should be a part of public education but is now “how much”.

    Many schools are emerging that are online-only (http://keystonehighschool.com/) or otherwise devoted to technology (http://www.neatorama.com/2010/01/09/school-teaches-its-students-almost-entirely-through-video-games/). You can even earn a doctorate at an online university (http://www.phoenix.edu/colleges_divisions/doctoral.html)! Additionally, online resources like the amateur Khan Academy or the commercial ALEKS (http://www.aleks.com/) are beginning to challenge several long-standing assumptions about the need for face-to-face instruction or even the need for teachers. Most importantly, it is worth stating that the research on eLearning is mixed, as a whole. A specific eLearning package may help in reading but not in mathematics, may help at third grade but not eighth grade, or may help on a state-level test but not on a national-level test. So, there is no clear answer on a “best” package or way to use technology. However, there are several key points to consider:

    Embarrassment

    To be honest, nobody likes to be wrong, and mathematics is a subject in which students are often told that they are, at least technically, incorrect. It is no wonder that eLearning can get such positive feedback from students. Many packages use little to no direct contract with a teacher; even if they do, a student is not going to be told they are incorrect in front of twenty or thirty of their peers. A private email is not so bad in comparison to even the gentlest public rebuke. Similarly, nobody needs to know if a given student has been successful either. It is often considered geeky to be good at school, especially in the STEM subjects. This turns many people away from science and mathematics, particularly girls. eLearning can provide a method to circumvent such peer scrutiny.

    Motivation

    Students like computers. Given a choice between a hands-on activity and an identical computer activity, many students will opt for the latter. Moreover, students like games, and eLearning developers are actively trying to capitalize on that appeal. While good in theory, a key implementation problem is that much edutainment uses the games as a reward for practice (http://www.funbrain.com/math/index.html) rather than as the means for actually teaching the material (http://ldt.stanford.edu/ldt1999/Students/kemery/esc/rockyDemoFrame.htm). I certainly approve of additional practice, but even the most motivated student requires a good explanation now and then.

    Willingness

    Another thing to keep in mind is that school occurs on a set schedule over which the student has little to no control. Much of eLearning is available whenever the student is willing to participate. In other words, those who succeed are those who have chosen to participate. In fact, research often shows that eLearning success is strongly dependent upon the amount of time a student participates. Of course, convincing someone to dedicate time and effort to actual eLearning is no

  7. Re:Give me fooking break by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For much of that time there wasn't a viable alternative and his business plan was to keep it that way. It's a bullshit argument people make that because there wasn't a gun involved that there must therefor have been a reasonable choice. Which is just something that Libertarians say so that they can sleep at night, the reality is that if you wanted to apply for a job and send in an electronic resume, good luck doing so with any other format than .doc because nobody would be looking at it. Or at work if you wanted to collaborate, you were stuck with Excel, Word, Powerpoint, etc., all owned and sold by MS. And that was their business plan, make people an offer that they had little choice but to accept at a price that was much higher than what the market would bear were there any real competition.

  8. Wow. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is one of the most impressive things I've ever seen on the Internet. Finally, somebody is taking a new medium and presenting this kind of lecture material in a format and method where students can obtain the material themselves. Kids, without money, can actually obtain this stuff and learn from it. It's not a product being sold, it's just incredible. I dreamed of this kind of content as a kid. I think all geeks did. It was only available to be doled out by clueless adults to learn at the pace they felt you were ready for it, or it was crap being shoveled at parents to give their kids a "head start"

    ...and presenting it world-wide, this is *stunning*.

  9. Gates complains a situation he created by walterbyrd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gates complains about smart Americans all going to Wall Street instead of R&D. But Gates has gone before the US congress, many times, and argued that even more US tech workers should lose their jobs to H1B visa workers.

    Just last year, even as Microsoft was firing US tech workers by the thousands, Microsoft was simultaneously hiring their H1B replacements.

    Due to the situation that Gates himself has helped create, smart Americans would be stupid to train for STEM (Science Technology Engineering Mathematics) jobs.

    1. Re:Gates complains a situation he created by mc+moss · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is why I left the tech sector and went straight into finance. That along with the ridiculous job requirements (must know every language under the sun) & ageism, staying in the tech sector for the long run didn't seem like a good idea.

      Still code as a hobby though :)

    2. Re:Gates complains a situation he created by DarkFencer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No - what often happens with H1B is the lying. You ever see those job postings which ask for impossible things like 20 years experience with Java or 7 years experience with Windows 7? The companies that want an excuse for H1B will accept (knowing its false) that the H1B applicants actually have that experience. They will use that excuse to say "Look - we can only find people with H1B that have this experience! We need to hire internationally!".

      I'm not saying all the time impossible skill requirements are because of this (there are ignorant people often writing job requirements) but it is true sometimes.

  10. Happy Student by Soulshift · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm currently teaching myself linear algebra with the aid of Khan's videos, and I couldn't be happier with the quality of the material.

    The fact that his work is steadily garnering more attention is a good thing in my view, since it increases the likelihood of more excellent videos being made available for free as a result of donations, grants, etc.

    --
    node-def: a tactical hacking sim. Now in open beta.
  11. Re:Give me fooking break by Beetle+B. · · Score: 3, Informative

    He gives money away that he has no use for anyway. Result: He can steer the direction of research that 'his' money goes to, he gets to decide which charities get money. With being an criminal in how he did business in Microsoft, he's effectively stolen money from hundreds of millions of people, driven other business into the ground, and taken away the choice to give to charity to other people. Whether that would have been done is another matter, he's still taken away the choice. Oh and as to giving away 'his' money, from what I've read he has not actually done so but in effect set up another business (the business of providing money to his selected charities) which is based on 'his' money but mainly giving other people's money, those people who have given their money to his foundation, away to his selected charities.

    You make it sound as if he made most of his money by charging the Windows tax for every computer sold, because that's the only really troublesome thing he did.

    Since you're talking about "choice", almost always people had the choice not to buy MS software. Almost always there was a viable alternative. If they paid for an overpriced product, almost none was forced to.

    And suggesting he's not giving his own money is just plain ignorant. Look it up - he gave $3.5 billion of his own money just in the last few years. And it's estimated that over his whole life, he's given $28 billion of his own assets away.

    --
    Beetle B.
  12. Re:Insert Star Trek Quote by Logarhythmic · · Score: 4, Funny

    Steve: I've done far worse than bankrupt you, Gates. I've humiliated you. And I wish to go on humiliating you. I shall leave you as you [kinda wish you could have] left me... marooned for all eternity in the mire of public opinion. Buried alive... buried alive

    Bill: JOOOOOOOOOOBS!

    --
    "Before criticizing someone, first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, you'll be a mile away... and you'll have his shoes."
  13. Re:RTF and ODT are Word-compatible formats by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately, Word and OpenOffice still can't seem to agree on formatting. It's subtle, but it does result in screwing up my every attempt to place appropriate page breaks -- one will make the text just slightly longer than the other.

    I've found a safe solution is to use OpenOffice, but ultimately produce a PDF if I care about printing. If I don't, I use something like Markdown and HTML.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  14. Re:RTF and ODT are Word-compatible formats by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

    If it makes you feel any better, this is also a problem between different versions of Word. Sucks but true.

    --
    Qxe4
  15. Re:Here we go again ... by Lobachevsky · · Score: 4, Informative

    Um, whom are you referring to when you say "he should 'give something back'" ? The lectures are not by Bill Gates, they're by Sal Khan. I don't think anybody accuses Khan of not giving back. Bill Gates is merely stating that Sal Khan is doing a good job, but Sal Khan does not work for Bill Gates or for Microsoft. Nor do Bill Gates or Microsoft seem to donate any money to Sal Khan.