Let everyone get away with it. Try to transmit information. Information does not follow conservation laws: yoy can learn something as you teach it. You gain, the students gain. Use tests as voluntary exercises, where students are free to help each other, and can do the test ad many times ad they want without penalty.
You've gone way beyond the true purpose of education in your draconian proposals. The true task of the educator is to help everyone get to an A+ level. Quoting Sebastian Thrun: "Grades are the failure of the education system."
The tests are the problem. When police are involved, your education has ceased to become about knowledge transfer. It is about control.
Tests aren't needed. They are a lazy, inaccurate way of assessing learning. Socrates needed no tests. Buddha never taught with a closed fist holding some knowledge back. Censorship promotes an effete monoculture, not innovation.
"In 1839, Swiss immigrant John Sutter settled in what is now Sacramento and began building a private empire defended by a fort. [...] Sutters fort became a symbol of oppression.
"Native Americans worked his fields [...] Sutter would control the Indian people through a system of forced labor.
[...]
"In 1848, the discovery of gold at Sutters sawmill set off a rush to California that would end the old world of the Sierra people and change their lives forever."
In other words, it started before the gold rush, but it could have been managed better without the blind greed of the forty-niners. It would have been slower, at least. Gold, the "barbarous metal".
The speeches Repubs are giving today are Calhoun with 'slavery' replaced by 'gay marriage' or 'abortion' or 'climate change'. Calhoun would win the Republican nomination.
Lincoln learned, unlike the conservatives of today.
In a speech delivered on April 11, while referring to plans for Reconstruction in Louisiana, Lincoln proposed that some blacks-including free blacks and those who had enlisted in the military-deserved the right to vote. He was assassinated three days later, however, and it would fall to his successor to put plans for Reconstruction in place.
Lincoln learned. He supported compensated emancipation, which the right-wingers of the day rejected for budgetary reasons, mainly; and ended up spending at least as much on the Civil War.
Calhoun's point of view is pretty much the same as the righties running today. The same rhetoric about "appeasement", the same paranoia about their way of life being destroyed. That is the essence of the right, and it is hopelessly backwards, on the wrong side of history.
No, the green revolution was a result of government research efforts that the private sector is too short-sighted to invest in.
Farmers are stupid sod-kickers who do ignorant things like kill prairie dogs out of paranoia, when actually the little critters help to irrigate the soil with their diggings.
The internet was rejected by the private sector. AT&T saw it as competition for their business model which was based on telephones. The right, which fetishizes the private sector, is not good at disruptive innovation. You need permissionless, disruptive innovation, not some rich capitalist telling you what to do.
"Miwok were great conservationists. Nothing was ever wasted. Game were killed and fish were caught not for sport, but to feed people. After they had inhabited this country for a number of centuries, the white man came and found the wild game plentiful, the streams fresh and clear, the air pure and clean, the timber uncut and the large deposits of gold still lay untouched in the foothills of the Sierras."
Compare to today: overpopulation, pollution, drought, clearcuts. There is much we could have learned from the native Americans; instead we greedily pursued the "barbarous metal" and ruined the land.
So we have it: there is no food scarcity, there is a desire on the right to impose their will on everyone else. There is no need to work, but I think my lawn needs to be manicured a little more, so you have to do it because although Reagan proved deficits don't matter, I want you to do what I order you to!
Instead of working on your lawn, create a Basic income and hold a challenge to design automatic lawn trimmers. I know that's a little too forward-thinking for your luddite blood pressure...
Can we talk about how the right endlessly defended slavery?
Take John C. Calhoun: "he became a greater proponent of states' rights, limited government, nullification and free trade".
I ran across this quotation the other day:
"I do not belong to the school which holds that aggression is to be met by concession. Mine is the opposite creed, which teaches that encroachments must be met at the beginning, and that those who act on the opposite principle are prepared to become slaves. In this case, in particular, I hold concession or compromise to be fatal. If we concede an inch, concession would follow concession--compromise would follow compromise, until our ranks would be so broken that effectual resistance would be impossible. We must meet the enemy on the frontier, with a fixed determination of maintaining our position at every hazard. . . . . . We of the South will not, cannot surrender our institutions. Too maintain the existing relations between the two races, inhabiting that section of the Union, is indispensable to the peace and happiness of both. It cannot be subverted without drenching the county in blood, and extirpating one or the other of the races. Be it good or bad, it has grown up with our society and institutions, and is so interwoven with them, that to destroy it would be to destroy us as a people. But let me not be understood as admitting, even by implication, that the existing relations between the two races in the slaveholding States is an evil: - far otherwise; I hold it to be a good, as it has thus far proved itself to be to both, and will continue to probe so if not disturbed by the fell spirit of abolition. I appeal to facts. Never before has the black race of Central Africa, from the dawn of history to the present day, attained a condition so civilized and so improved, not only physically, but morally and intellectually. It came among us in a low, degraded, and savage condition, and in the course of a few generations it has grown up under the fostering care of our institutions, reviled as they have been, to its present comparatively civilized condition. This, with the rapid increase of numbers, is conclusive proof of the general happiness of the race, in spite of all the exaggerated tales to the contrary. . . . . . Be assured that emancipation itself would not satisfy these fanatics: -that gained, the next step would be to raise the negroes to a social and political equality with the whites; and that being effected, we would soon find the present condition of the two races reversed. They and their northern allies would be the masters, and we the slaves; the condition of the white race in the British West India Islands, bad as it is, would be happiness to ours."
The left doesn't uphold Stalin, but the right sticks to most of that still. Originalists!
What are the good intentions in cutting food stamps and social programs, when there is no scarcity of food or housing? They're defending scarcity thinking, not civilization, which has advanced enough to maintain a minimum standard of living for everyone. #BasicIncome!
But greed inevitably involves the environment. Example: the gold rush, which ruined the pristine environment that had existed unchanged by the American Indians for centuries. Also logging, clearcutting all that priceless old growth for "plush" toilet paper, or other silly vain trifles.
There are many possible ways to explain "Reality". Einstein's is just one. The ether theories have not been disproved but simply disdained. Yves Couder's experiments can be taken as support for ether theory (he doesn't go that far, but Bohm does).
So current models are just whims. There are other possibilities that haven't caught on for purely social reasons. Similar to language rules...
Slashdot Mirror
s/yoy/you
s/ad/as
Let everyone get away with it. Try to transmit information. Information does not follow conservation laws: yoy can learn something as you teach it. You gain, the students gain. Use tests as voluntary exercises, where students are free to help each other, and can do the test ad many times ad they want without penalty.
Give up testing altogether. Help everyone get to an A+ level.
You've gone way beyond the true purpose of education in your draconian proposals. The true task of the educator is to help everyone get to an A+ level. Quoting Sebastian Thrun: "Grades are the failure of the education system."
http://singularityhub.com/2012...
The tests are the problem. When police are involved, your education has ceased to become about knowledge transfer. It is about control.
Tests aren't needed. They are a lazy, inaccurate way of assessing learning. Socrates needed no tests. Buddha never taught with a closed fist holding some knowledge back. Censorship promotes an effete monoculture, not innovation.
GOP-funded astroturf alert!
http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/... .pdf
"In 1839, Swiss immigrant John Sutter settled in what is now Sacramento and began building a private empire defended by a fort. [...] Sutters fort became a symbol of oppression.
"Native Americans worked his fields [...] Sutter would control the Indian people through a system of forced labor.
[...]
"In 1848, the discovery of gold at Sutters sawmill set off a rush to California that would end the old world of the Sierra people and change their lives forever."
In other words, it started before the gold rush, but it could have been managed better without the blind greed of the forty-niners. It would have been slower, at least. Gold, the "barbarous metal".
Or you could just go Galt. Pretty please? Can I raise your taxes, to make you leave sooner?
The speeches Repubs are giving today are Calhoun with 'slavery' replaced by 'gay marriage' or 'abortion' or 'climate change'. Calhoun would win the Republican nomination.
Lincoln learned, unlike the conservatives of today.
http://www.history.com/topics/...
Conveniently ignore that greenpeace apologized and acknowledged it made a mistake.
Lincoln learned. He supported compensated emancipation, which the right-wingers of the day rejected for budgetary reasons, mainly; and ended up spending at least as much on the Civil War.
Calhoun's point of view is pretty much the same as the righties running today. The same rhetoric about "appeasement", the same paranoia about their way of life being destroyed. That is the essence of the right, and it is hopelessly backwards, on the wrong side of history.
No, the green revolution was a result of government research efforts that the private sector is too short-sighted to invest in.
Farmers are stupid sod-kickers who do ignorant things like kill prairie dogs out of paranoia, when actually the little critters help to irrigate the soil with their diggings.
The internet was rejected by the private sector. AT&T saw it as competition for their business model which was based on telephones. The right, which fetishizes the private sector, is not good at disruptive innovation. You need permissionless, disruptive innovation, not some rich capitalist telling you what to do.
From http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/...
"Miwok were great conservationists. Nothing was ever wasted. Game were killed and fish were caught not for sport, but to feed people. After they had inhabited this country for a number of centuries, the white man came and found the wild game plentiful, the streams fresh and clear, the air pure and clean, the timber uncut and the large deposits of gold still lay untouched in the foothills of the Sierras."
Compare to today: overpopulation, pollution, drought, clearcuts. There is much we could have learned from the native Americans; instead we greedily pursued the "barbarous metal" and ruined the land.
So we have it: there is no food scarcity, there is a desire on the right to impose their will on everyone else. There is no need to work, but I think my lawn needs to be manicured a little more, so you have to do it because although Reagan proved deficits don't matter, I want you to do what I order you to!
Instead of working on your lawn, create a Basic income and hold a challenge to design automatic lawn trimmers. I know that's a little too forward-thinking for your luddite blood pressure...
Can we talk about how the right endlessly defended slavery?
Take John C. Calhoun: "he became a greater proponent of states' rights, limited government, nullification and free trade".
I ran across this quotation the other day:
The left doesn't uphold Stalin, but the right sticks to most of that still. Originalists!
What are the good intentions in cutting food stamps and social programs, when there is no scarcity of food or housing? They're defending scarcity thinking, not civilization, which has advanced enough to maintain a minimum standard of living for everyone. #BasicIncome!
How does this ex-greenpeace guy feel about begley? Does he write him checks now?
Newtonian mechanics can't predict the time anomalies crucial to getting GPS to work.
But greed inevitably involves the environment. Example: the gold rush, which ruined the pristine environment that had existed unchanged by the American Indians for centuries. Also logging, clearcutting all that priceless old growth for "plush" toilet paper, or other silly vain trifles.
I despise the society we live in, you insensitive clod!
How much does a bird brain weigh, but they're such good musicians, and migrate thousands of miles?
In your analogy, the something blowing air into the balloon is moving faster than the snail.
The incentive to steal increases.
There are many possible ways to explain "Reality". Einstein's is just one. The ether theories have not been disproved but simply disdained. Yves Couder's experiments can be taken as support for ether theory (he doesn't go that far, but Bohm does).
So current models are just whims. There are other possibilities that haven't caught on for purely social reasons. Similar to language rules...
I've made several attempts to learn Devanagari script. I wonder if the programs in this challenge could help.