The senior-equivalents in our school had swipe cards, but that was because we were permitted to just come in for classes - we didn't need to stay in school for study periods. And strangely, the teachers *did* notice if someone was electronically present but not in classes... I remember one person getting caught, and the practice soon stopped.
It wasn't a barcode, it was a metal cap that allowed the Tripods to command the humans and required the humans to obey. Generally the Tripods had no concept of "individual" humans.
I can't say I notice the ads dragging page load time down - I've been running Adblock with Filterset G for so long that it startles me to use another browser and see how horrific some of the pages really are!
Adblock has a nice little compromise: change the settings to hide ads rather than remove them. You lose the primary benefit of removing the ads (increased page load speed) but gain the ability to support the site without being hassled by the ads everywhere you go.
Surely it's not the entries themselves that directly gain credibility, but the parts written by authors who have previously shown themselves to be accurate and trustworthy (i.e. their edits generally remain for longer)?
Wikipedia encourages references, so all it could take is one person making an edit and referencing an expert, reliable source showing the correct non-myth to change the angle of the article.
IIRC, the lower level maths and science exams were for students who would be totally unmotivated when they saw the real ones. I think the highest possible grade for those exams was a C, and they'd need fairly much 90% to get that. Most students were expected to get a D, which would show that they had some basic understanding but no real grasp of the subject, as it should. (The alternative, at the time, being no maths qualification at all and therefore no maths teaching.)
Hey, you give me 19th century ideas, I provide the imagery.
Yep. I'm sure it was so accurate 2 centuries ago. Whoever would have thought that the system would still not allow any below the upper class, or who happened to be female, into university? Shocking.
It's not that I object to so much as barriers to entry arising early on. If, as you say, the UK system is flexible, I have no problem with it. What I do have a problem with is having to start limiting your options at the age of 14. Of course, what if you want to be an engineer who has an interest in poetry or literature or philosophy? You're hosed?
I have a problem with students being forced to take generic classes all the way through high school and university when they have no inclination for the subject, no desire to take it and know they won't ever be using it simply because you "don't want to limit their options". An English major should not be stopped from graduating because he or she can't pass calculus, for example.
What I like about the U.S. system is that once you get into university, you can take lower-division courses wherever you want if you're not sure what you want yet.
That's the same in British schools. I believe they're called "electives".
This isn't as much a difference as you think it is. In the UK, you might have one year-long course. In the US, you have two- or three-course sequences which you take in the fall and spring semesters, or the fall, winter, and spring quarters, depending on how your university operates. And I've never even seen a four-week summer session--mine have been six or eight weeks. They're also either (a) for ambitious students who are relying on themselves to be able to retain a semester's worth of work in eight weeks or (b) for unambitious students who failed it the first time around, in which case they've had even longer than most students working on the subject.
A typical British freshman would take 3-4 courses: one would be the nominal major, one typically from the same school, and the others are electives. You take those courses for the year, giving you the opportunity to really get your head around the concepts of each class. Taking a class for only a semester merely ensures that just when you're getting the hang of it, it's time to stop.
Plenty of schools here in the U.S. offer short but intensive summer sessions which range from four weeks upwards.
We still have coal mines in America. Yes, I'm aware of that. There are no active mines in Britain any more, but feel free to look.
Thanks for those wonderful stereotyped, inaccurate and completely irrelevant images. Please send me any gold-headed canes you find, as I'm sure their scarcity makes them worth listing on eBay.
The point is not that you're *stuck* in a system from which you cannot change, but that you gradually start narrowing down your options and studying your chosen subjects in more detail rather than studying multiple subjects without sufficient understanding of any of them.
The universities here get you to study each subject for a term, possibly a period of only 4 weeks during summer semesters. How can you learn and remember a subject thoroughly in that time? You can't. You can however get a good understanding when you study a subject for a year at a time.
The UK system is flexible. There is always the possibility to change your subjects, though if you start studying pure arts and humanities and then suddenly want to switch to hard sciences it might delay you for a year.
And I'm sure you could get a great living in the coal mines, if you could find one. Good luck with that.
I agree.
I grew up under the British system where I had to pick 10 subjects for GCSEs (choice at age 14) then 3-4 subjects for A-levels (choice at 16), followed by subject-specific applications to university (age 17-18). The gradual narrowing of options seems ideal to me. Sure you have to make tough choices, but at 14 I already knew that no matter how much I wanted to do certain careers I didn't have enough interest or ability to do well in the subject.
I now work in an American university where I see students bumbling through school as "Undeclared General Studies" majors. They have no idea what they're doing, finally pick a major and start taking specific courses only to realize that it's not for them. Back to the starting line.
Why is it such a bad thing to encourage high school students to make realistic assessments about the subjects they're interested in and the ones they have the ability to do? We can't all be doctors, lawyers, vets, fighter pilots and even a 14yo will know this.
Although, somewhat amusingly, one of our sysadmins recently left to go to... law school. And another member of the IT team is also in law school. (It's also now the standing joke: "I'm not leaving/moving/going home, I'm going to law school"!)
I had friends who used hotmail and had the same problem - some emails just didn't reach them. They didn't appear in the junk folder, didn't bounce... just never arrived. A few years later there are students still not receiving emails, despite being correctly addressed, because they're using a hotmail account.
It appears that hotmail randomly deletes some incoming mail, but never if it's from another hotmail user. The worst part is that there's no way of knowing unless someone says, "Why didn't you reply to my last email?" or words to that effect.
Disclaimer: I have made no official test. This is purely anecdotal evidence from people whinging about emails sometimes not getting through.
The LOTR books themselves had fallen into public domain, allowing anyone to reprint or read them with no extra charges, but the movie rights had been sold some time before. I remember reading that Peter Jackson wanted to film LOTR earlier but couldn't get the movie rights' holders to agree.
I don't believe he was saying that old = irrelevant, more that people are generally wanting to find more details of current information rather than a snippet from an old conversation.
I do, however, disagree with him. Reading the comments in context can be incredibly useful, along the same lines of knowing that other people have had the same problem for X (weeks, months, years) and therefore there is no quick solution.
The key is balance: sometimes you want a detailed, in-depth article, and sometimes you want a quick overview with some opinions or debate. As long as the means exist to find both, I shall remain happy.
You can renounce it. You can effectively renounce it by committing certain acts (see state.gov for specific details). So if you were judged to have committed an act of treason you could lose your citizenship.
Women; Learn how to defend yourselves. A knee to the groin will usually disuade the most aggresive attacker, and pepper spray is always a hit at the parties. You are in control in that confrontation; The attacker has just convinced you otherwise. Don't let him.
So when a man a foot taller and 100lb heavier with more upper body strength grabs you and threatens your life (with or without a weapon) you will *always* have the ability to knee him in the groin and reach for the pepper spray in your purse/on your keychain?
I think not.
Most self-defence classes tell you to RUN first if you have the opportunity, scream "Fire!" if possible to draw attention, and only then try to use physical force. Because men are almost always stronger than women, even if the woman works out.
(And if the woman is more than X shorter than her attacker, it can be all but impossible to knee him in the groin simply because of the height difference. Try to kick, and he'll grab your foot and now you can't even run and are probably lying on the ground with a concussion.)
If you are a dual national you can indeed lose your American citizenship. Whether or not it would be immediate, and then followed by deportation, most likely depends on the circumstances. Either way there's likely to be a hearing unless proof was given that the citizenship was obtained fraudulently.
FERPA applies to all students, and covers more than just academic scores and academic file. It can also include whether or not a student is enrolled, their name, status, class, any contact information, and a lot more. In certain cases a school cannot even confirm whether or not someone is a student there.
I was sceptical on this point too, until I read other parts of the topic: this system is based on net-metering. Excess power generated (on sunny days) gives you credits, which you then use when you are not generating enough (cloudy/rainy days). You have a year to use the credits. So, at least in theory, it should all balance out over the year and you only pay for what you use.
Slashdot Mirror
The senior-equivalents in our school had swipe cards, but that was because we were permitted to just come in for classes - we didn't need to stay in school for study periods. And strangely, the teachers *did* notice if someone was electronically present but not in classes... I remember one person getting caught, and the practice soon stopped.
It wasn't a barcode, it was a metal cap that allowed the Tripods to command the humans and required the humans to obey. Generally the Tripods had no concept of "individual" humans.
I can't say I notice the ads dragging page load time down - I've been running Adblock with Filterset G for so long that it startles me to use another browser and see how horrific some of the pages really are!
Adblock has a nice little compromise: change the settings to hide ads rather than remove them. You lose the primary benefit of removing the ads (increased page load speed) but gain the ability to support the site without being hassled by the ads everywhere you go.
Surely it's not the entries themselves that directly gain credibility, but the parts written by authors who have previously shown themselves to be accurate and trustworthy (i.e. their edits generally remain for longer)? Wikipedia encourages references, so all it could take is one person making an edit and referencing an expert, reliable source showing the correct non-myth to change the angle of the article.
IIRC, the lower level maths and science exams were for students who would be totally unmotivated when they saw the real ones. I think the highest possible grade for those exams was a C, and they'd need fairly much 90% to get that. Most students were expected to get a D, which would show that they had some basic understanding but no real grasp of the subject, as it should. (The alternative, at the time, being no maths qualification at all and therefore no maths teaching.)
Yep. I'm sure it was so accurate 2 centuries ago. Whoever would have thought that the system would still not allow any below the upper class, or who happened to be female, into university? Shocking.
It's not that I object to so much as barriers to entry arising early on. If, as you say, the UK system is flexible, I have no problem with it. What I do have a problem with is having to start limiting your options at the age of 14. Of course, what if you want to be an engineer who has an interest in poetry or literature or philosophy? You're hosed?I have a problem with students being forced to take generic classes all the way through high school and university when they have no inclination for the subject, no desire to take it and know they won't ever be using it simply because you "don't want to limit their options". An English major should not be stopped from graduating because he or she can't pass calculus, for example.
What I like about the U.S. system is that once you get into university, you can take lower-division courses wherever you want if you're not sure what you want yet.That's the same in British schools. I believe they're called "electives".
This isn't as much a difference as you think it is. In the UK, you might have one year-long course. In the US, you have two- or three-course sequences which you take in the fall and spring semesters, or the fall, winter, and spring quarters, depending on how your university operates. And I've never even seen a four-week summer session--mine have been six or eight weeks. They're also either (a) for ambitious students who are relying on themselves to be able to retain a semester's worth of work in eight weeks or (b) for unambitious students who failed it the first time around, in which case they've had even longer than most students working on the subject.A typical British freshman would take 3-4 courses: one would be the nominal major, one typically from the same school, and the others are electives. You take those courses for the year, giving you the opportunity to really get your head around the concepts of each class. Taking a class for only a semester merely ensures that just when you're getting the hang of it, it's time to stop.
Plenty of schools here in the U.S. offer short but intensive summer sessions which range from four weeks upwards.
We still have coal mines in America. Yes, I'm aware of that. There are no active mines in Britain any more, but feel free to look.The point is not that you're *stuck* in a system from which you cannot change, but that you gradually start narrowing down your options and studying your chosen subjects in more detail rather than studying multiple subjects without sufficient understanding of any of them.
The universities here get you to study each subject for a term, possibly a period of only 4 weeks during summer semesters. How can you learn and remember a subject thoroughly in that time? You can't. You can however get a good understanding when you study a subject for a year at a time.
The UK system is flexible. There is always the possibility to change your subjects, though if you start studying pure arts and humanities and then suddenly want to switch to hard sciences it might delay you for a year.
And I'm sure you could get a great living in the coal mines, if you could find one. Good luck with that.
I agree. I grew up under the British system where I had to pick 10 subjects for GCSEs (choice at age 14) then 3-4 subjects for A-levels (choice at 16), followed by subject-specific applications to university (age 17-18). The gradual narrowing of options seems ideal to me. Sure you have to make tough choices, but at 14 I already knew that no matter how much I wanted to do certain careers I didn't have enough interest or ability to do well in the subject. I now work in an American university where I see students bumbling through school as "Undeclared General Studies" majors. They have no idea what they're doing, finally pick a major and start taking specific courses only to realize that it's not for them. Back to the starting line. Why is it such a bad thing to encourage high school students to make realistic assessments about the subjects they're interested in and the ones they have the ability to do? We can't all be doctors, lawyers, vets, fighter pilots and even a 14yo will know this.
I bet those workers had an interesting time explaining the outage...
Although, somewhat amusingly, one of our sysadmins recently left to go to... law school. And another member of the IT team is also in law school. (It's also now the standing joke: "I'm not leaving/moving/going home, I'm going to law school"!)
I had friends who used hotmail and had the same problem - some emails just didn't reach them. They didn't appear in the junk folder, didn't bounce... just never arrived. A few years later there are students still not receiving emails, despite being correctly addressed, because they're using a hotmail account. It appears that hotmail randomly deletes some incoming mail, but never if it's from another hotmail user. The worst part is that there's no way of knowing unless someone says, "Why didn't you reply to my last email?" or words to that effect. Disclaimer: I have made no official test. This is purely anecdotal evidence from people whinging about emails sometimes not getting through.
The LOTR books themselves had fallen into public domain, allowing anyone to reprint or read them with no extra charges, but the movie rights had been sold some time before. I remember reading that Peter Jackson wanted to film LOTR earlier but couldn't get the movie rights' holders to agree.
I don't believe he was saying that old = irrelevant, more that people are generally wanting to find more details of current information rather than a snippet from an old conversation. I do, however, disagree with him. Reading the comments in context can be incredibly useful, along the same lines of knowing that other people have had the same problem for X (weeks, months, years) and therefore there is no quick solution. The key is balance: sometimes you want a detailed, in-depth article, and sometimes you want a quick overview with some opinions or debate. As long as the means exist to find both, I shall remain happy.
If it was "deported" (="expelled from the camp") then it could've taken 12 minutes.
You can renounce it. You can effectively renounce it by committing certain acts (see state.gov for specific details). So if you were judged to have committed an act of treason you could lose your citizenship.
Women; Learn how to defend yourselves. A knee to the groin will usually disuade the most aggresive attacker, and pepper spray is always a hit at the parties. You are in control in that confrontation; The attacker has just convinced you otherwise. Don't let him. So when a man a foot taller and 100lb heavier with more upper body strength grabs you and threatens your life (with or without a weapon) you will *always* have the ability to knee him in the groin and reach for the pepper spray in your purse/on your keychain? I think not. Most self-defence classes tell you to RUN first if you have the opportunity, scream "Fire!" if possible to draw attention, and only then try to use physical force. Because men are almost always stronger than women, even if the woman works out. (And if the woman is more than X shorter than her attacker, it can be all but impossible to knee him in the groin simply because of the height difference. Try to kick, and he'll grab your foot and now you can't even run and are probably lying on the ground with a concussion.)
If you are a dual national you can indeed lose your American citizenship. Whether or not it would be immediate, and then followed by deportation, most likely depends on the circumstances. Either way there's likely to be a hearing unless proof was given that the citizenship was obtained fraudulently.
At least it's [theoretically] better for the crowd than other methods of riot control, such as CM or vomit gas.
Or you could follow LJ's suggestions and change your password before using any other service, run the backup, and then change your password again.
FERPA applies to all students, and covers more than just academic scores and academic file. It can also include whether or not a student is enrolled, their name, status, class, any contact information, and a lot more. In certain cases a school cannot even confirm whether or not someone is a student there.
I was sceptical on this point too, until I read other parts of the topic: this system is based on net-metering. Excess power generated (on sunny days) gives you credits, which you then use when you are not generating enough (cloudy/rainy days). You have a year to use the credits. So, at least in theory, it should all balance out over the year and you only pay for what you use.