Leave it up to the hyper-analytical lot at slashdot to show complete ignorance about music. You can't quantify music. It is very subjective and playing an instrument is an art that cannot be measured by frequency analysis. A qualitative analysis (i.e. qualified judges) is the only way to determine how well an instrumentalist is playing.
Drummer here (semi-professional, i.e., serious hobbyist that gets paid for session work even though I have a "real" job). Rock band drums are nothing like real drums. They don't even map the pads in a standard drum kit configuration.
In my day job, I design and sell computer training courses, so yes, I understand NREs. I have a huge expenditure up front that I slowly recover (and hopefully make a profit) as more copies sell.
A song doesn't have to be crap not to sell well. That's why music is different than software--it's much more subjective.
That's also why I don't bother to sell music and I just play live for the enjoyment of playing.
My drums alone cost me over $5k. My sound equipment is another $10k.
I don't record music and sell it so I don't get any money from the music industry. I play live music. Come to a show and you'll see that one song is indeed worth at least $1.
People pirate 99 cent songs. Lower prices will not prevent that. It's a dollar...seriously...how much cheaper than one dollar will something have to be before people stop pirating it? Answer: $1.
So if you don't think there's a mechanism in place to "teach children based on the personality and gifts of each specific child", that tells me you don't know the first thing about curriculum design. This explains your distorted view of reality and your misplaced distrust. You just want to lash out at that which you don't understand, which, like I've been saying, is the problem with education. Dolts like yourself who THINK they know better, but when confronted with science and evidence, you go all 1890s schoolhouse on us.
What do you propose...a bunch of adults just sitting around and teaching "stuff" to students without any credentials or interest in learning the best teaching methodologies, or learning about early childhood development or cognitive processes? Yeah, you are right. Education as a discipline is a total farce.
And this is what is wrong with public education. Unless there is a consensus among the general American Public, public education will continue to fail. Public education cannot succeed unless the general public agrees as to what purpose it is intended to serve.
Thank you for making my point. The American public is the problem, not education.
it is MY job to apply community standards
Where do "community standards" come from if you reject the idea of listening to what the general public (the community) has to say on the issue. You are an elitist pig, who thinks he knows enough to tell other people how they should live their lives.
No, I'm an expert in curriculum design who is qualified to tell people who aren't qualified in curriculum design what makes good curriculum. Is the kid who changes the oil in my car elitist because he's the one who knows how to change the oil? Who am I, unskilled at oil changing, to tell the guy how he should change oil.
If you are such an expert in curriculum design, how come education in the U.S. has gotten worse as your discipline has gotten more advanced?
First of all, you can't provide data that show education has gotten worse in the U.S. Even if it is, there are a million social and economic reasons to it that are out of my domain. Schools aren't getting worse because of declining curriculum developers' skills...if anything they are getting worse (if they even are getting worse) because of the meddling of Joe Public who knows nothing about education.
Community standards come from the community (duh), but is only ONE PART of curriculum development. What you are advocating is that community standards drive 100% of the curriculum, which would be a mistake, because most people don't know the first thing about instructional design or curriculum development. That doesn't make me an elitist. If anything, it shows I'm a pragmatic and it makes me one of very few people who is skilled in developing curriculum.
It's "consensus". Perhaps you are making my case for me.
Who am I to decide???? Are you freakin' serious? IT'S MY JOB TO DECIDE AND I HAVE BEEN DELEGATED THAT AUTHORITY THROUGH MY QUALIFICATIONS. I'm an expert in curriculum design. Joe Public isn't. That means I went to six years of college to learn about psychology, education, public policy, administration, et. al. Not to mention I also spent six months writing research. Joe Public just wants to keep Christ in Christmas and likes to bitch when the soda machines are removed from the cafeterias and doesn't know the first damn thing about writing objectives and standards and using measurement devices to ensure they are met. They don't have the slightest damn clue what is in their children's best educational interest, because that gets in the way of football practice.
Parents are the usually the problem so why should I bend to their backassward views? They can instill whatever values they want in their children at home, but as a curriculum professional, it is MY job to apply community standards and district standards to the curriculum that I am writing. It is a great responsibility that I take very seriously--more seriously than most parents.
With that, not all parents are shit bags and of course parents should have input to their community standards and school curriculum. It's just the out-of-touch outliers who demand their precious snowflakes be fed extra special fish sticks and get to be on the varsity football team don't have the right priorities for the general population, and if we bow to everyone's demands, then there is no core curriculum.
If you think that a consensus can be reached amongst the American Public on ANYTHING, then you are vastly more optimistic than I am. Do you watch the news? Do you follow politics?
And now I notice your sig and it all makes sense...
The consensus should be amongst curriculum experts, not parents, and definitely NOT politicians (albeit school administration is a form of politician).
If random Joe is offended by a curriculum item that curriculum experts deem to be important, they have a couple choices (and they'll probably choose home/private schooling). It's not the curriculum expert's job to appease the mass-mentality and popular opinion--it is our job to create standards and objectives that best help kids succeed. We are also loosely bound by the gray area referred to as "community standards", which are easy in some homogeneous areas, but difficult in urban/diverse areas such as Austin, TX. Community standards change drastically in any 15 mile direction outside of Austin City Limits.
The people of Texas, for the most part, have no clue of what makes for good curriculum development, thus their opinions don't really matter. Imagine if you left oil changing procedures up to the 200 residents on Street X, and none of them were mechanics...same thing.
What about "want to read a really good book but don't want to pay anything for it"?
That's what I use the library for. Why buy a book you'll read probably once, when you can just go to the library (mine is actually closer than the closest bookstore) and check it out. Read it. Return it. How hard is that?
I don't think Libraries will survive for much longer.
With the current climate of slashing funding for anything remotely intellectual set by the newly elected morons in Washington, I'd say libraries are doomed.
Since the US has compulsory education, I'm not sure "removing those children who refuse to learn" would have any legal merit. Grouping "those who refuse to learn" in a different curriculum that addresses the reasons behind their unwillingness to learn that removes them from distracting the general student body already exists. It's called special education. I think it should be carried to the next level where special education candidates should be grouped and put into entire schools. This goes for advanced students as well (also part of special education that most people aren't aware, as they are too busy bashing those special education kids who are "unwilling to learn"). If we did it like Germany, gifted kids with real interest in academia would be grouped with other gifted kids. Mediocre kids would get the type of vocational training they need to succeed in society. Difficult kids would get the sort of curriculum that addresses the particular causes of their difficultness and perhaps allow them to improve their social statuses.
And yes, we do have concensus (sic) to what children need to learn. It's called standards-based curriculum. Certainly whack-job religious zealots like we have here in Texas make it look like there isn't consensus, there are curriculum professionals like myself who try our best to eliminate those sort of outliers.
Just because most people are unaware that most states have openly available standards, doesn't mean we have no consensus as what our children need to learn. Look at your local school district standards and if you don't think what's in there is valid, take it up with local government.
Libraries are as obsolete as ballet, opera, fine art, public transportation, public television, and any number of things that MOST people never use. Doesn't mean they should go away, however.
His "refund" comes when he stops acting like an ass and waits out his penalty, at which point he can play? (Not saying I agree, just throwing that out there).
Human rights exist regardless of the religious frameworks you are trying to associate with human rights.
Just like morality exists without religion, even though religious people can't understand that.
I've lived 41 years with a concerted effort to avoid religion, yet I have a pretty good framework for knowing what is right and wrong...all your talk about your religions and cultures be damned.
Sorry, but you can't claim "hidden bullshit" in defense of not reading the lengthy bull shit that is in the TOS when you click "I accept". If it's right there in black and white, then you can't really claim it is hidden, now can you?
Sorry, but no. Nobody is talking about removing the reply all (or at least I don't see it here). What I do see are people who are advocating a better UI that makes reply all less likely to be pressed when not needed, and/or educating people about the appropriate times for using reply all.
So this only works with Valve games then? I have played exactly three video games in the past 5 years (HL2, WoW and Dragon Age), and Dragon Age was on my PS3, so I have no idea really how Steam works these days.
First, let me be upfront and say if you don't do stupid shit and get your dumb ass banned in one game from a particular company, they have no reason to ban you from a second game.
Second, however, I think #2 in your example does NOT clearly imply that bad behavior in one game can cause a ban in a second game. It says "access to your game"...singular...as in the game you were acting like an a-hole, you may not have access to it.
Now if #2 said, "games" and not "game", I'm all for banning dumbasses from playing other games (caveat: what's the purpose of banning a guy from a single player game, though?...seems like a lazy way to enforce online bans...blanket banning).
If I sound conflicted, I am. Unlike the rabid black/white world of slashdot, there is merit to both black and white in this instance. Predictably, the black side will pirate their games and bitch about big corporation and DRM and the white side will stick to their world view. Anyone care to meet me in the middle?
Are you sure about that? Did you read the terms? If some legal-ese says "if you make bad comments about us on our forum, your game will stop working" and you clicked "I Agree", then what's the problem again?
Yes, this! If stupid behavior had real consequences, like, I dunno, disallowing you to play a game you paid for, maybe stupid behavior would be less prevalent.
I agree completely, however, isn't there an option in Steam to register a game you own in physical form in Steam, so you can forget about the physical form? I'm pretty sure I have the Half Life 2 discs, but I play through Steam...unless I was stupid and purchased both?
Slashdot Mirror
Leave it up to the hyper-analytical lot at slashdot to show complete ignorance about music. You can't quantify music. It is very subjective and playing an instrument is an art that cannot be measured by frequency analysis. A qualitative analysis (i.e. qualified judges) is the only way to determine how well an instrumentalist is playing.
Drummer here (semi-professional, i.e., serious hobbyist that gets paid for session work even though I have a "real" job). Rock band drums are nothing like real drums. They don't even map the pads in a standard drum kit configuration.
I learned a lot about drumming rhythm and limb separation
I am a drummer, and in 25 years, I've never seperated a limb. You're doing it wrong.
And those 1-5 cent songs will still turn up on bittorrent, which is my point.
In my day job, I design and sell computer training courses, so yes, I understand NREs. I have a huge expenditure up front that I slowly recover (and hopefully make a profit) as more copies sell.
A song doesn't have to be crap not to sell well. That's why music is different than software--it's much more subjective.
That's also why I don't bother to sell music and I just play live for the enjoyment of playing.
My drums alone cost me over $5k. My sound equipment is another $10k.
I don't record music and sell it so I don't get any money from the music industry. I play live music. Come to a show and you'll see that one song is indeed worth at least $1.
I'm a musician. It costs a lot more than $1 to make a song, so selling for $1 seems like a concession to me.
People pirate 99 cent songs. Lower prices will not prevent that. It's a dollar...seriously...how much cheaper than one dollar will something have to be before people stop pirating it? Answer: $1.
So if you don't think there's a mechanism in place to "teach children based on the personality and gifts of each specific child", that tells me you don't know the first thing about curriculum design. This explains your distorted view of reality and your misplaced distrust. You just want to lash out at that which you don't understand, which, like I've been saying, is the problem with education. Dolts like yourself who THINK they know better, but when confronted with science and evidence, you go all 1890s schoolhouse on us.
What do you propose...a bunch of adults just sitting around and teaching "stuff" to students without any credentials or interest in learning the best teaching methodologies, or learning about early childhood development or cognitive processes? Yeah, you are right. Education as a discipline is a total farce.
And this is what is wrong with public education. Unless there is a consensus among the general American Public, public education will continue to fail. Public education cannot succeed unless the general public agrees as to what purpose it is intended to serve.
Thank you for making my point. The American public is the problem, not education.
it is MY job to apply community standards
Where do "community standards" come from if you reject the idea of listening to what the general public (the community) has to say on the issue. You are an elitist pig, who thinks he knows enough to tell other people how they should live their lives.
No, I'm an expert in curriculum design who is qualified to tell people who aren't qualified in curriculum design what makes good curriculum. Is the kid who changes the oil in my car elitist because he's the one who knows how to change the oil? Who am I, unskilled at oil changing, to tell the guy how he should change oil.
If you are such an expert in curriculum design, how come education in the U.S. has gotten worse as your discipline has gotten more advanced?
First of all, you can't provide data that show education has gotten worse in the U.S. Even if it is, there are a million social and economic reasons to it that are out of my domain. Schools aren't getting worse because of declining curriculum developers' skills...if anything they are getting worse (if they even are getting worse) because of the meddling of Joe Public who knows nothing about education.
Community standards come from the community (duh), but is only ONE PART of curriculum development. What you are advocating is that community standards drive 100% of the curriculum, which would be a mistake, because most people don't know the first thing about instructional design or curriculum development. That doesn't make me an elitist. If anything, it shows I'm a pragmatic and it makes me one of very few people who is skilled in developing curriculum.
It's "consensus". Perhaps you are making my case for me.
Who am I to decide???? Are you freakin' serious? IT'S MY JOB TO DECIDE AND I HAVE BEEN DELEGATED THAT AUTHORITY THROUGH MY QUALIFICATIONS. I'm an expert in curriculum design. Joe Public isn't. That means I went to six years of college to learn about psychology, education, public policy, administration, et. al. Not to mention I also spent six months writing research. Joe Public just wants to keep Christ in Christmas and likes to bitch when the soda machines are removed from the cafeterias and doesn't know the first damn thing about writing objectives and standards and using measurement devices to ensure they are met. They don't have the slightest damn clue what is in their children's best educational interest, because that gets in the way of football practice.
Parents are the usually the problem so why should I bend to their backassward views? They can instill whatever values they want in their children at home, but as a curriculum professional, it is MY job to apply community standards and district standards to the curriculum that I am writing. It is a great responsibility that I take very seriously--more seriously than most parents.
With that, not all parents are shit bags and of course parents should have input to their community standards and school curriculum. It's just the out-of-touch outliers who demand their precious snowflakes be fed extra special fish sticks and get to be on the varsity football team don't have the right priorities for the general population, and if we bow to everyone's demands, then there is no core curriculum.
If you think that a consensus can be reached amongst the American Public on ANYTHING, then you are vastly more optimistic than I am. Do you watch the news? Do you follow politics?
And now I notice your sig and it all makes sense...
The consensus should be amongst curriculum experts, not parents, and definitely NOT politicians (albeit school administration is a form of politician).
If random Joe is offended by a curriculum item that curriculum experts deem to be important, they have a couple choices (and they'll probably choose home/private schooling). It's not the curriculum expert's job to appease the mass-mentality and popular opinion--it is our job to create standards and objectives that best help kids succeed. We are also loosely bound by the gray area referred to as "community standards", which are easy in some homogeneous areas, but difficult in urban/diverse areas such as Austin, TX. Community standards change drastically in any 15 mile direction outside of Austin City Limits.
The people of Texas, for the most part, have no clue of what makes for good curriculum development, thus their opinions don't really matter. Imagine if you left oil changing procedures up to the 200 residents on Street X, and none of them were mechanics...same thing.
What about "want to read a really good book but don't want to pay anything for it"?
That's what I use the library for. Why buy a book you'll read probably once, when you can just go to the library (mine is actually closer than the closest bookstore) and check it out. Read it. Return it. How hard is that?
I don't think Libraries will survive for much longer.
With the current climate of slashing funding for anything remotely intellectual set by the newly elected morons in Washington, I'd say libraries are doomed.
Since the US has compulsory education, I'm not sure "removing those children who refuse to learn" would have any legal merit. Grouping "those who refuse to learn" in a different curriculum that addresses the reasons behind their unwillingness to learn that removes them from distracting the general student body already exists. It's called special education. I think it should be carried to the next level where special education candidates should be grouped and put into entire schools. This goes for advanced students as well (also part of special education that most people aren't aware, as they are too busy bashing those special education kids who are "unwilling to learn"). If we did it like Germany, gifted kids with real interest in academia would be grouped with other gifted kids. Mediocre kids would get the type of vocational training they need to succeed in society. Difficult kids would get the sort of curriculum that addresses the particular causes of their difficultness and perhaps allow them to improve their social statuses.
And yes, we do have concensus (sic) to what children need to learn. It's called standards-based curriculum. Certainly whack-job religious zealots like we have here in Texas make it look like there isn't consensus, there are curriculum professionals like myself who try our best to eliminate those sort of outliers.
Just because most people are unaware that most states have openly available standards, doesn't mean we have no consensus as what our children need to learn. Look at your local school district standards and if you don't think what's in there is valid, take it up with local government.
Libraries are as obsolete as ballet, opera, fine art, public transportation, public television, and any number of things that MOST people never use. Doesn't mean they should go away, however.
His "refund" comes when he stops acting like an ass and waits out his penalty, at which point he can play? (Not saying I agree, just throwing that out there).
Human rights exist regardless of the religious frameworks you are trying to associate with human rights.
Just like morality exists without religion, even though religious people can't understand that.
I've lived 41 years with a concerted effort to avoid religion, yet I have a pretty good framework for knowing what is right and wrong...all your talk about your religions and cultures be damned.
Sorry, but you can't claim "hidden bullshit" in defense of not reading the lengthy bull shit that is in the TOS when you click "I accept". If it's right there in black and white, then you can't really claim it is hidden, now can you?
Sorry, but no. Nobody is talking about removing the reply all (or at least I don't see it here). What I do see are people who are advocating a better UI that makes reply all less likely to be pressed when not needed, and/or educating people about the appropriate times for using reply all.
So this only works with Valve games then? I have played exactly three video games in the past 5 years (HL2, WoW and Dragon Age), and Dragon Age was on my PS3, so I have no idea really how Steam works these days.
First, let me be upfront and say if you don't do stupid shit and get your dumb ass banned in one game from a particular company, they have no reason to ban you from a second game.
Second, however, I think #2 in your example does NOT clearly imply that bad behavior in one game can cause a ban in a second game. It says "access to your game"...singular...as in the game you were acting like an a-hole, you may not have access to it.
Now if #2 said, "games" and not "game", I'm all for banning dumbasses from playing other games (caveat: what's the purpose of banning a guy from a single player game, though?...seems like a lazy way to enforce online bans...blanket banning).
If I sound conflicted, I am. Unlike the rabid black/white world of slashdot, there is merit to both black and white in this instance. Predictably, the black side will pirate their games and bitch about big corporation and DRM and the white side will stick to their world view. Anyone care to meet me in the middle?
Are you sure about that? Did you read the terms? If some legal-ese says "if you make bad comments about us on our forum, your game will stop working" and you clicked "I Agree", then what's the problem again?
Yes, this! If stupid behavior had real consequences, like, I dunno, disallowing you to play a game you paid for, maybe stupid behavior would be less prevalent.
I agree completely, however, isn't there an option in Steam to register a game you own in physical form in Steam, so you can forget about the physical form? I'm pretty sure I have the Half Life 2 discs, but I play through Steam...unless I was stupid and purchased both?