I think you're being a bit unfair towards some of the ideas. I see a lot of potential, for example, in being able to generate randomized, individualized, instantly-graded homework sets for students. A lot of these systems are pretty "smart," and can identify a student's individual weaknesses and give them more practice where they need it. They can also let students zip past the parts they already understand and so get to harder material as appropriate. The teacher plays an important role in being able to provide assistance to the students that are stuck. With a classroom of 30 students, expecting a teacher to generate this level of individualized work for each student on their own is impractical.
I'm not sure if the original submitter had his tongue in cheek by describing the co-author Ekhad as a "computer scientist." Just in case he didn't, note that Shalosh B. Ekhad is actually Zeilberger's computer. Since most of Zeilberger's research depends heavily on computations, and (I think) as a nod to some of his philosophical positions, Zeilberger usually lists his computer as a coauthor on his papers. So I guess Ekhad is a computer scientist, but not quite in the way we usually mean.:)
When I was young, I used to stay up just long enough to catch Jack Horkheimer's Star Hustler program on TV. That funny little whistly theme still brightens my day whenever I hear it. Thanks for all the fond memories, Jack.
The answers to your questions depend on what you think is the purpose of a published book review.
In my discipline (mathematics), reviews of research monographs that appear in journals usually have an opening paragraph describing the book under review and a couple of closing paragraphs summarizing the contents of the book, judging the quality of the book, and sometimes listing the errors found by the reviewer. In between those paragraphs are pages and pages in which the reviewer usually gives his or her personal view of the subject of the book. That is, book reviews are seen as excuses for a reviewer to write exposition about a subject he or she enjoys. I think it's a little strange, and rarely interesting, but that's the norm.
I agree with the sentiment I once read that it's a waste of time to review a bad book, especially a mediocre one. A book review should, in my opinion, either steer the reader towards a book worth reading, explaining why the book is worthy and important; or, in cases of books published with a lot of fanfare (e.g., Wolfram's A New Kind of Science), discuss the merits or lack thereof of a book of which the reader is already aware. Why waste the time of reviewers and readers trashing a book no one will hear of otherwise? Just let such books die deservedly in obscurity.
A notable exception is an entertaining review of a truly wretched book. That's fun to read, but only if the reviewer is sufficiently talented to pull it off.
I suppose the GP is talking about the Toshiba NB205. Although it doesn't have a 12" screen, it does have a full-size keyboard, and the wife and I have been exceptionally pleased with the one we bought a month ago. The full-size "chiclet"-style keyboard is what finally sold it to us -- I tried out several other models, and I just couldn't see myself enjoying typing on the smaller keyboards for long. Now that I've entered the realm of the truly portable computer, I don't think I'll ever want to go back!
Because "Microsoft destroyed credibility" is not grammatically correct in this context. He should have said "Microsoft's credibility destroyed;" the [sic] is letting the reader know that the error was Allchin's, not due to whoever quoted Allchin.
The problem is that the vast majority of students, at least in my experience, lack "experience and judgment." I routinely get research reports from freshmen in which all sources are from the internet and most of the sources are Wikipedia. Heck, even our seniors do this. The conversation the prof is having with his students is one of those steps that lead to "experience and judgment."
I don't have much of a problem with Wikipedia as a trustworthy source -- almost all of the information I've seen on it in my field (math) is accurate. My problem with students using Wikipedia is that it's just lazy.
I'm not quite sure why you need all of this excessive math and science (except when the Computer Science is in the School of Engineering--but not all colleges are like this).
Because it's computer science, i.e. the science of computing. A CS degree, for better or worse, is not a programming apprenticeship.
I just read the linked Gerstmann interview and was disappointed that it didn't add more clarity to the story. Of course, as has been repeatedly mentioned, Gerstmann is not allowed to comment on why he was fired. Given that GameSpot has very clearly denied firing him for hurting their bottom line, that doesn't seem quite fair. Why is GameSpot allowed to defend itself (by denying they inappropriately fired Gerstmann), but Gerstmann is not allowed to defend himeself (by perhaps insisting that GameSpot *did* fire him inappropriately)?
On the other hand, this may be a bit of a boon for Gerstmann, especially if he was fired for simply doing a bad job. After all, right now he looks like a victim -- without this controversy, he might just look incompetent. Maybe Gerstmann has good reason to keep quiet.:)
I can't tell whether you actually want an answer or not, but I'll bite: The set of games for the Wii and the set of games for the PC are not the same set. Therefore, if you want good performance on a game that is exclusive to the PC (or, even if it's not exclusive, you prefer the PC control scheme, or the fact that PC graphics can outdo those on a console (especially the Wii)), then you need a decent graphics card.
I think it's important to note that publication is ceasing because WotC chose not to renew the license to Paizo. Paizo, as you may or may not recall, took over publishing rights for Dungeon and Dragon in 2002. Seems WotC has changed the mind about the value of such content.
This reminds me of the somewhat recent choice by WotC not to renew the license to CodeMonkey for the PC-Gen (character generation software) data sets. Clearly WotC is set to make a big push into online and electronic supplements to their D&D line.
Oh, and I see that Paizo will still be publishing adventures through a publication called Pathfinder. Looks interesting. At least gamers will still have some way to get their paper adventure fix.
I understand your point that it may tarnish Wikipedia's reputation to have articles about such "trivial" pop culture items. On the other hand, these are some of my favorite articles on Wikipedia. If there's some cultural item (be it a sci-fi series, a rock star, or even a "genuine" work of art) that I want to learn more about, I like knowing I can find some decent information on it in one place. Sure, these articles aren't going to necessarily advance human knowledge in a meaningful way, but they're informative and entertaining, and sometimes that's enough.
As a college student, I lived in Budapest for four months. The amount of and ease of use of the public transport in that city was stunning to me. There was a great subway system (the first in Europe, if I recall correctly) supplemented by buses and trams that ran on time and frequently. (The residents of Budapest would often complain bitterly if a bus was running 5 minutes late; in every American city I've lived in, busses running at least 20 minutes late on a regular basis is the norm.) On top of that, a monthly pass for the entire system was quite affordable, and markets were within walking distance of most residences. It was tremendously liberating. I'd love to go carless (or at least use my car less), but I haven't yet lived anywhere where I could afford to live in the part of town that made that practical.
The question the students were asked to respond to (in the sample essays) was "Do memories hinder or help people in their effort to learn from the past and succeed in the present?" With a question like that, how could you expect much more than rambling idea/word association? I mean, without memory, there is no learning.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're being a bit unfair towards some of the ideas. I see a lot of potential, for example, in being able to generate randomized, individualized, instantly-graded homework sets for students. A lot of these systems are pretty "smart," and can identify a student's individual weaknesses and give them more practice where they need it. They can also let students zip past the parts they already understand and so get to harder material as appropriate. The teacher plays an important role in being able to provide assistance to the students that are stuck. With a classroom of 30 students, expecting a teacher to generate this level of individualized work for each student on their own is impractical.
I'm not sure if the original submitter had his tongue in cheek by describing the co-author Ekhad as a "computer scientist." Just in case he didn't, note that Shalosh B. Ekhad is actually Zeilberger's computer. Since most of Zeilberger's research depends heavily on computations, and (I think) as a nod to some of his philosophical positions, Zeilberger usually lists his computer as a coauthor on his papers. So I guess Ekhad is a computer scientist, but not quite in the way we usually mean. :)
When I was young, I used to stay up just long enough to catch Jack Horkheimer's Star Hustler program on TV. That funny little whistly theme still brightens my day whenever I hear it. Thanks for all the fond memories, Jack.
The answers to your questions depend on what you think is the purpose of a published book review.
In my discipline (mathematics), reviews of research monographs that appear in journals usually have an opening paragraph describing the book under review and a couple of closing paragraphs summarizing the contents of the book, judging the quality of the book, and sometimes listing the errors found by the reviewer. In between those paragraphs are pages and pages in which the reviewer usually gives his or her personal view of the subject of the book. That is, book reviews are seen as excuses for a reviewer to write exposition about a subject he or she enjoys. I think it's a little strange, and rarely interesting, but that's the norm.
I agree with the sentiment I once read that it's a waste of time to review a bad book, especially a mediocre one. A book review should, in my opinion, either steer the reader towards a book worth reading, explaining why the book is worthy and important; or, in cases of books published with a lot of fanfare (e.g., Wolfram's A New Kind of Science), discuss the merits or lack thereof of a book of which the reader is already aware. Why waste the time of reviewers and readers trashing a book no one will hear of otherwise? Just let such books die deservedly in obscurity.
A notable exception is an entertaining review of a truly wretched book. That's fun to read, but only if the reviewer is sufficiently talented to pull it off.
I suppose the GP is talking about the Toshiba NB205. Although it doesn't have a 12" screen, it does have a full-size keyboard, and the wife and I have been exceptionally pleased with the one we bought a month ago. The full-size "chiclet"-style keyboard is what finally sold it to us -- I tried out several other models, and I just couldn't see myself enjoying typing on the smaller keyboards for long. Now that I've entered the realm of the truly portable computer, I don't think I'll ever want to go back!
Because "Microsoft destroyed credibility" is not grammatically correct in this context. He should have said "Microsoft's credibility destroyed;" the [sic] is letting the reader know that the error was Allchin's, not due to whoever quoted Allchin.
The problem is that the vast majority of students, at least in my experience, lack "experience and judgment." I routinely get research reports from freshmen in which all sources are from the internet and most of the sources are Wikipedia. Heck, even our seniors do this. The conversation the prof is having with his students is one of those steps that lead to "experience and judgment."
I don't have much of a problem with Wikipedia as a trustworthy source -- almost all of the information I've seen on it in my field (math) is accurate. My problem with students using Wikipedia is that it's just lazy.
I'm not quite sure why you need all of this excessive math and science (except when the Computer Science is in the School of Engineering--but not all colleges are like this).
Because it's computer science, i.e. the science of computing. A CS degree, for better or worse, is not a programming apprenticeship.
I just read the linked Gerstmann interview and was disappointed that it didn't add more clarity to the story. Of course, as has been repeatedly mentioned, Gerstmann is not allowed to comment on why he was fired. Given that GameSpot has very clearly denied firing him for hurting their bottom line, that doesn't seem quite fair. Why is GameSpot allowed to defend itself (by denying they inappropriately fired Gerstmann), but Gerstmann is not allowed to defend himeself (by perhaps insisting that GameSpot *did* fire him inappropriately)?
:)
On the other hand, this may be a bit of a boon for Gerstmann, especially if he was fired for simply doing a bad job. After all, right now he looks like a victim -- without this controversy, he might just look incompetent. Maybe Gerstmann has good reason to keep quiet.
I can't tell whether you actually want an answer or not, but I'll bite: The set of games for the Wii and the set of games for the PC are not the same set. Therefore, if you want good performance on a game that is exclusive to the PC (or, even if it's not exclusive, you prefer the PC control scheme, or the fact that PC graphics can outdo those on a console (especially the Wii)), then you need a decent graphics card.
This reminds me of the somewhat recent choice by WotC not to renew the license to CodeMonkey for the PC-Gen (character generation software) data sets. Clearly WotC is set to make a big push into online and electronic supplements to their D&D line.
Oh, and I see that Paizo will still be publishing adventures through a publication called Pathfinder. Looks interesting. At least gamers will still have some way to get their paper adventure fix.
I understand your point that it may tarnish Wikipedia's reputation to have articles about such "trivial" pop culture items. On the other hand, these are some of my favorite articles on Wikipedia. If there's some cultural item (be it a sci-fi series, a rock star, or even a "genuine" work of art) that I want to learn more about, I like knowing I can find some decent information on it in one place. Sure, these articles aren't going to necessarily advance human knowledge in a meaningful way, but they're informative and entertaining, and sometimes that's enough.
As a college student, I lived in Budapest for four months. The amount of and ease of use of the public transport in that city was stunning to me. There was a great subway system (the first in Europe, if I recall correctly) supplemented by buses and trams that ran on time and frequently. (The residents of Budapest would often complain bitterly if a bus was running 5 minutes late; in every American city I've lived in, busses running at least 20 minutes late on a regular basis is the norm.) On top of that, a monthly pass for the entire system was quite affordable, and markets were within walking distance of most residences. It was tremendously liberating. I'd love to go carless (or at least use my car less), but I haven't yet lived anywhere where I could afford to live in the part of town that made that practical.
The question the students were asked to respond to (in the sample essays) was "Do memories hinder or help people in their effort to learn from the past and succeed in the present?" With a question like that, how could you expect much more than rambling idea/word association? I mean, without memory, there is no learning.