This is a downside to the government doing something that they don't want others to know about in the first place. The downside comes from the fact that this information exists, not that it leaked.
The quote on the bottom of the page is very appropriate right now. "Truth is hard to find and harder to obscure"
This is a truly archaic way of thinking about language as restricting what we can think about. We can certainly conceptualize things that we don't have words or language to express. That entire sentence seems paradoxical to me; how did we come up with a language to express anything to start with if we couldn't conceive of the ideas the language expresses without a language to express them?
To me, the key to education in mathematics is teaching problem solving, but the curriculum and teaching methods have moved to just a simplistic model of teaching rules to learn to regurgitate. These rules are so abstract that it's hard to conceive their use in real life application, and so they're learned for students' tests in class, if even that, and then shortly forgotten because they're so inapplicable.
I completely understand where Ramanathan is coming from, but I think it comes off in this summary as needing to completely abolish math at all. Truly, the best idea seems to be not to strictly teach these rules in a 'reference sheet' sort of manner, but to teach how to come to the conclusions that lead to these rules. This will lead to a better actual understanding of what math is, I believe.
Really, the government should require the companies to test these things instead of having the government completely involved in babying every toy company. Then when they slip up make them pay dearly. Making sure everything that reaches us is safe shouldn't be the direct responsibility of the government, rather making sure it's the companies that deliver these products to us responsibility.
If I were to become a parent now, then I would only put these restrictions up on my teenagers to tell them: "You're restricted until you can figure out how to get around it." Because that's how I learned as much as I know now about computers.
Seriously though, forcing all of these restrictions will only cause them to resent you. If they want to look at porn then they'll find a way to get to it, if they can't find that then they have active enough imaginations and attractive enough girls at school. Sure, you can say that could happen, but at least you're not enabling it. However, talking to your children about it instead of just restricting them from it and saying that's that will help them from developing some sort of complex.
And how about this: Maybe your children are more night people than day people, as is the case with myself. This is a completely alright thing, but is for some reason frowned upon by parents who do things like restrict what hours they can be on the computer. Let them stay up as late as they want, let them sleep during the day. Soon they'll learn what they prefer. Either they'll dread feeling so tired at school because they didn't get enough sleep, or they'll miss spending time with their friends who don't keep the same hours as them, or they'll be completely fine with it.
You need to help them develop these things while under your supervision, because once they're set free in the world and not under your supervision anymore then all of these things that were taboo and inaccessible before are right there and they'll be poorly adjusted to them.
Whenever I was younger we had one computer in the living room that everyone used. My family was N = 4 where only half the users used the computer the majority of the time. My dad used it for playing freecell, my mom hardly ever used it, and my brother and I would then fight over who would use it. This didn't really force interaction, or at least positive interaction, and what I was doing when I wasn't on the computer was watching tv while waiting next to the computer to use it.
This set time restrictions on when we could use the computer because my parents would just come out of their room and say "Get off the computer, go to bed." There were still "secrets" on the computer because we knew that it would take a little more than deleting the history to hide what we had done on the computer, so we figured out how to do that first, then we did whatever we wanted. We got in trouble if there was a virus, so that was something we learned how to deal with too before our dad found out and we had to sit there watching him bumble around menus trying to figure out what to do while cursing at us.
I could see this being the true death of the radio. At least the radio in the current AM/FM format. I can't think of how many times I've wished my car had some kind of access to the internet so that I could listen to last.fm.
After competing in several Cybersecurity competitions, this seems to be an analog to the idea that the best way to keep someone from owning your system is to just unplug the system from the outside world until you can confidently defend the attack.
Lately I've been trying out using Google Translate to improve my German. Whenever I write a sentence that I'm not too sure about, I take my English version of it and translate it into German in Google to see how it compares. So far it's been useful in better understanding preposition usage and sentence structure. That is, if it's reliable enough.
Not to disagree with the results of your test, but I think a better test would be actual translations from authentic Chinese text to English. Going from English to Chinese to English is like taking an English interpretation of what the Chinese are trying to interpret from what someone was saying authentically in English instead of just interpreting into English what someone was authentically saying in Chinese.
I'm 20 years old and back in Elementary school they forced cursive on us; always telling us, "You need to learn this now, if you don't write your papers in cursive when you get older then they'll give you an F." After I got out of elementary school cursive was never mentioned again.
Three years ago when I had to take the SAT we had to write a sort of contract statement and it had to be written in cursive, but no one in the room knew how to write in cursive except for the teacher, she had to write the letters up on the board because we didn't even know what they looked like.
Cursive is definitely dead.
I've seen countless discussions on what programming language to start off in, especially when you're younger. People will throw around all sorts of suggestions based on what they wished they started learning about at first; learn Java because it teaches you OOP and you can use it on any system, learn C++ because it's used everywhere, learn Assembly because you'll understand memory and everything completely, learn Pascal because it's easy to understand.
But none of this is considering the youth's actual interest in programming; why they want to start programming. Whenever I first started programming around 14 or 15 I wanted to see results. At first I was in a stupor to learn that my program wouldn't be in a GUI automatically and that I'd have to stick my programs in a command line program. Really, this kind of angered me and turned me off of programming at first.
I'd say, the best language for a young programmer would be something that can truly get them results, so I'd suggest Python or Perl because of their enormous selection of libraries and modules that give you a simple interface to do so much. If you can get a youth interested by giving them a lot of power that's easy to understand, then they'll learn a lot about programming concepts in ways that interest them and they'll be captivated enough to go further and learn the other languages and concepts.
Youth won't be interested in learning how to be software developers, you need to show them a reason to.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a downside to the government doing something that they don't want others to know about in the first place. The downside comes from the fact that this information exists, not that it leaked. The quote on the bottom of the page is very appropriate right now. "Truth is hard to find and harder to obscure"
Doesn't making it the world's most boring day also make it much less boring?
This is a truly archaic way of thinking about language as restricting what we can think about. We can certainly conceptualize things that we don't have words or language to express. That entire sentence seems paradoxical to me; how did we come up with a language to express anything to start with if we couldn't conceive of the ideas the language expresses without a language to express them?
To me, the key to education in mathematics is teaching problem solving, but the curriculum and teaching methods have moved to just a simplistic model of teaching rules to learn to regurgitate. These rules are so abstract that it's hard to conceive their use in real life application, and so they're learned for students' tests in class, if even that, and then shortly forgotten because they're so inapplicable.
I completely understand where Ramanathan is coming from, but I think it comes off in this summary as needing to completely abolish math at all. Truly, the best idea seems to be not to strictly teach these rules in a 'reference sheet' sort of manner, but to teach how to come to the conclusions that lead to these rules. This will lead to a better actual understanding of what math is, I believe.
It seems like we've seen this already. Somewhere.....
"...either had way too much time on his hands or just really enjoys Halo..." I don't think this is an either or sort of thing...
Really, the government should require the companies to test these things instead of having the government completely involved in babying every toy company. Then when they slip up make them pay dearly. Making sure everything that reaches us is safe shouldn't be the direct responsibility of the government, rather making sure it's the companies that deliver these products to us responsibility.
If only this could be combined so that it sucks up oily water from the gulf of mexico, cleans off the oil, then makes clouds with it.
If I were to become a parent now, then I would only put these restrictions up on my teenagers to tell them: "You're restricted until you can figure out how to get around it." Because that's how I learned as much as I know now about computers.
Seriously though, forcing all of these restrictions will only cause them to resent you. If they want to look at porn then they'll find a way to get to it, if they can't find that then they have active enough imaginations and attractive enough girls at school. Sure, you can say that could happen, but at least you're not enabling it. However, talking to your children about it instead of just restricting them from it and saying that's that will help them from developing some sort of complex.
And how about this: Maybe your children are more night people than day people, as is the case with myself. This is a completely alright thing, but is for some reason frowned upon by parents who do things like restrict what hours they can be on the computer. Let them stay up as late as they want, let them sleep during the day. Soon they'll learn what they prefer. Either they'll dread feeling so tired at school because they didn't get enough sleep, or they'll miss spending time with their friends who don't keep the same hours as them, or they'll be completely fine with it.
You need to help them develop these things while under your supervision, because once they're set free in the world and not under your supervision anymore then all of these things that were taboo and inaccessible before are right there and they'll be poorly adjusted to them.
If you don't allow your children adult responsibility then when they're thrust into being expected to show it they're going to be completely lost.
Whenever I was younger we had one computer in the living room that everyone used. My family was N = 4 where only half the users used the computer the majority of the time. My dad used it for playing freecell, my mom hardly ever used it, and my brother and I would then fight over who would use it. This didn't really force interaction, or at least positive interaction, and what I was doing when I wasn't on the computer was watching tv while waiting next to the computer to use it. This set time restrictions on when we could use the computer because my parents would just come out of their room and say "Get off the computer, go to bed." There were still "secrets" on the computer because we knew that it would take a little more than deleting the history to hide what we had done on the computer, so we figured out how to do that first, then we did whatever we wanted. We got in trouble if there was a virus, so that was something we learned how to deal with too before our dad found out and we had to sit there watching him bumble around menus trying to figure out what to do while cursing at us.
I could see this being the true death of the radio. At least the radio in the current AM/FM format. I can't think of how many times I've wished my car had some kind of access to the internet so that I could listen to last.fm.
After competing in several Cybersecurity competitions, this seems to be an analog to the idea that the best way to keep someone from owning your system is to just unplug the system from the outside world until you can confidently defend the attack.
except for Augenballgroße which is essentially Eye-ball-large.
Actually, gross in this usage is referring to relative size in a way, so it would mean eye-ball sized.
Lately I've been trying out using Google Translate to improve my German. Whenever I write a sentence that I'm not too sure about, I take my English version of it and translate it into German in Google to see how it compares. So far it's been useful in better understanding preposition usage and sentence structure. That is, if it's reliable enough.
Not to disagree with the results of your test, but I think a better test would be actual translations from authentic Chinese text to English. Going from English to Chinese to English is like taking an English interpretation of what the Chinese are trying to interpret from what someone was saying authentically in English instead of just interpreting into English what someone was authentically saying in Chinese.
I'm 20 years old and back in Elementary school they forced cursive on us; always telling us, "You need to learn this now, if you don't write your papers in cursive when you get older then they'll give you an F." After I got out of elementary school cursive was never mentioned again. Three years ago when I had to take the SAT we had to write a sort of contract statement and it had to be written in cursive, but no one in the room knew how to write in cursive except for the teacher, she had to write the letters up on the board because we didn't even know what they looked like. Cursive is definitely dead.
I've seen countless discussions on what programming language to start off in, especially when you're younger. People will throw around all sorts of suggestions based on what they wished they started learning about at first; learn Java because it teaches you OOP and you can use it on any system, learn C++ because it's used everywhere, learn Assembly because you'll understand memory and everything completely, learn Pascal because it's easy to understand. But none of this is considering the youth's actual interest in programming; why they want to start programming. Whenever I first started programming around 14 or 15 I wanted to see results. At first I was in a stupor to learn that my program wouldn't be in a GUI automatically and that I'd have to stick my programs in a command line program. Really, this kind of angered me and turned me off of programming at first. I'd say, the best language for a young programmer would be something that can truly get them results, so I'd suggest Python or Perl because of their enormous selection of libraries and modules that give you a simple interface to do so much. If you can get a youth interested by giving them a lot of power that's easy to understand, then they'll learn a lot about programming concepts in ways that interest them and they'll be captivated enough to go further and learn the other languages and concepts. Youth won't be interested in learning how to be software developers, you need to show them a reason to.
...why I don't understand how people don't believe in natural selection.