Students have had notebooks en masse for 10-15 years now, and THOSE didn't really revolutionize the classroom.
This is what always bothers me about the tech in classroom push, I graduated college only two years ago and while it makes me feel like a Luddite to say it, I think the combination of a video projector connected to the professor's laptop, a whiteboard, and a student with pen and paper doesn't really have a whole lot of room for improvement outside of specialized cases. My sister in law is an elementary teacher, so I know kids are one of the cases where tech can be put to really good use, but this article is talking about college and so will I.
Software is about automation, and for the most part we've already solved most of the pain points that detract from the ability to have a productive lecture. I think thats why most of the real improvements have been made in online classes, and the online components of traditional classes. By making all course materials instantly accessible anywhere the only things that lectures have over online classes anymore is the immediacy of interaction with the professor, and the act of note-taking. What else actually matters in a lecture and what tech could actually help that in the lecture hall? Maybe something like google moderator for huge class sizes would be useful? I'd say that being able to recall anything that happened in the lectures would be great, but even when I had access to recordings of a multi-campus class I took over a teleconferencing service I never used them.
And the note taking device doesn't really make a whole lot of difference, software can't (yet) automate the act of putting information into your brain. I did some classes with pen and paper, I did some by typing on a laptop, and a classmate used a laptop-that-rotates-into-touchscreen-and-stylus job; it's all just a matter of preference really.
That sounds like a particularly nasty mess right there, as most of the attacks originate from foreign soil.
This is terrible terrible news for the coffee shops of the world that offer free wifi.
Because if someone can break in, either the company broken into is completely incompetent at their own security, or the attacker is good enough to have the foresight required to not to launch an attack from their own network.
It's not that most of these guys are necessarily bad people, but hackers (in the DEFCON sense) do tend to follow alpha male mentality. Now mix that up with copious amounts of alcohol, the poor social adjustment that many geeks have, and the "anything goes" attitude of Sin City, and yeah you'll have problems.
My experience was that most attendee's poor social adjustment manifested as incredibly timid behavior. You know, just like any nerd-out-of-water ever.
The guy I went to Vegas with made it his mission (and I eventually joined him to a small extent) to spend the weekend pulling people out of their shells.
I used to think this was just an insult to apple buyers. Then the iPhone 4s came out. I'll never forget the first words that came out of my apple buying friend's mouth after seeing the design. "How will anyone be able to tell I have the new one?"
Business is usually more concerned with people than technology.
Correct. High level businesspeople don't not care about social relations, statistically they're actually more likely than the general population to be psychopaths, and even when they're not diagnostically so, they make use of the same social toolbox as a psychopath.
Fix the families. Restore family values. Education and all other aspects of life will follow.
I agree that parents are the problem, they need to take a more active role in their children's education, but what are family values? And how are they going to fix the educational life of any child?
I'm not being sarcastic, I actually want to know what "restoring family value" means, because as far as I've been able to tell its a dog whistle term for other things, most of which don't have anything to do with parenting and the few that do are about sheltering children from sex. None of which does dogshit towards making kids care about their own education.
This is the core issue of network neutrality! A network provider should be a neutral network provider, it should not prioritise one vendor's service over another vendor's equivalent service
Yup, this really is the core of the issue. Now, its easy to understand why this exception they've given themselves seems to make sense, the problem is what it implies. A popular 'worst case' is that service providers can't just buy bandwidth and sling to all consumers limited only by the bandwidth they buy and the network path to the consumer. Now, with comcast pulling this, it will eventually be rightly called out as anti-compeptive, they will go to whatever authority calls them out hat-in-hand and say they just can't afford to pull all that data from an outside network, but offer to allow content providers unlimited access to their customers if the other provider does the legwork to get the traffic on comcast's "internal" network, now to "remain competitive" the Netflixs of the world have to start eating more and more costs as they rework their locations and their choice of upstream provider to conform with every consumer ISP whos customers they want to serve to get around artificial roadblocks erected by the ISP.
No it's because Schneier has a conflict-of-interest since he's a hostile party in an ongoing lawsuit against the TSA. It makes sense that he would be excluded.
Last year they were both able to testify, just in separate sessions.
at least there is a bit I admire from them and it's their independence. They are only pursuing the IPO because they are forced to, but Zuckerberg has attempted to keep things indie (huge indie but still indie) all this time.
Facebook stopped being indie years and years ago (issuing shares, taking VC cash). Since then its all been carefully managed image and branding. He was never forced to IPO, its just his chickens coming home to roost.
Are you trying to say ignorance of foreign issues and jingoism isn't a the best way to form opinions on international matters? You're such a communist.
The vast majority of people searching for santorum are searching for info about the candidate, not obscene material. If Google wants to provide useful search results, they will change the policy.
They don't need to change the policy. If its not what they're looking for, spreading santorum will start naturally falling in the results. The fact that its not falling is proof that people are searching for 'santorum' to get some laughs from Savage's page.
I'd heat water with it but have yet to find an effective and efficient means to do so with wood or paper.
Back when we had an electric hot water heater we just built a metal reservoir into our wood stove and plumbed it into line with the cold water feed to the heater. The heater still functioned normally, but whenever we were heating with wood the input water was already at temperature and the tank would only have to maintain (or slightly heat) the input water.
Its a start, and not hard to hack into your existing setup. What we had was pretty simple, but knocked a huge chunk from the electricity used by the heater. I don't think you'll find a good way to use paper/wood as the primary source of heat, but as a secondary that does most of the lifting you'll find a lot of options.
I've assumed that the US government has been intercepting all our communications since they first had the technical ability.
I look at this the same way I might view a person who said to me "I've always assumed that an invisible Bigfoot watches me whenever I masturbate".
Given the US government has given themselves the ability to perform wholesale monitoring of communications (Room 641A is the easiest proof to point to), we must also posit that there is an invisible Bigfoot, and that he frequently watches people masturbate.
No, its just interesting. The fact it isn't a rounder number makes it a curiosity of how they arrived at $27.63 exactly. Why not $27.50, or $27 or $28. What difference do those few cents in compensation make in the mind of the bill authors? Is it just the hourly wage of someone making $X a year where X is actually a round number? Was it chosen because of its point on the distribution curve of typical IT worker compensation? Did the sponsors of the bill sit late into the night, debating adding and removing provisions of the bill along with cents to and from the hourly rate cited? Does whoever paid congress for the bill pay their IT folk $27.64/hr?
should be demanding better, but then they go and try propping up something like the Simpsons for a couple decades because it's a safe bet for viewer share.
Y'know, I think that if The Simpsons was the worst kind of programming we had to deal with, I'd call it a victory. Sure they've lost their charm for a lot of people, but even if their comedic voice has changed it still is a decent show with amazing production value.
The FCC's directive is not to ensure the value of your stock. The FCC asked AT&T why the merger was good for consumers and AT&T wasn't able to provide a reasonable one.
As someone who recently came of voting age, its kind of jarring to see our government function like this. I'm used to seeing the public interest railroaded to benefit a corporate interest, a corporate interest railroaded to benefit a different corporate interest, but I've never seen the public interest held above a corporate interest like this. Hell, they didn't even decide anything and I'm excited to see this, I know they would be able to jam up the merger eventually, but right now they've just presenting findings.
Is this what democracy is supposed to look like? I fucking love it. Shit, even if government decisions continue to be against the public interest, I'd be psyched if they just had the balls to admit it with reports like this. That would be a huge step forward from the bullshit "someone is making money, therefore its good, fuck off" level of analysis I'm used to seeing.
So you think assert() is a substitute for proper exception handling? Really?
In this case specific case, sure, why the hell not? Its DNS, and you've found that you're in an impossible state. What else are you supposed to do? Even if the process hasn't been compromised, by the nature of the assert you've failed and don't know how to recover. Do you want to keep on serving DNS, assuming the process is in a state where it is fine to keep on trucking? Or maybe enter a do-nothing failure mode, which is just as useful as going down hard, but with the added bonus that the process is experiencing unknown problems and you want to rely on it to contain itself properly.
And I didn't say it was a substitute for proper exception handling, just that you're going to let exceptions you haven't prepared for to bring the process down, rather than blindly swallowing them. Or do you think this is good code:
try:
foo() except Exception, e:
pass # EVERYTHINGS FINE, GO BACK TO WORK! bar()
Deployed code with asserts in it is crap, and would violate any contract I've worked to since 1995.
At least this was just teh interwebs that it broke. If it had been safety-related, someone would be ducking under their desk trying to call their lawyer.
So your code, that you make sound more important and/or safety related than DNS, doesn't have any failsafes? Really?
Slashdot Mirror
Students have had notebooks en masse for 10-15 years now, and THOSE didn't really revolutionize the classroom.
This is what always bothers me about the tech in classroom push, I graduated college only two years ago and while it makes me feel like a Luddite to say it, I think the combination of a video projector connected to the professor's laptop, a whiteboard, and a student with pen and paper doesn't really have a whole lot of room for improvement outside of specialized cases. My sister in law is an elementary teacher, so I know kids are one of the cases where tech can be put to really good use, but this article is talking about college and so will I.
Software is about automation, and for the most part we've already solved most of the pain points that detract from the ability to have a productive lecture. I think thats why most of the real improvements have been made in online classes, and the online components of traditional classes. By making all course materials instantly accessible anywhere the only things that lectures have over online classes anymore is the immediacy of interaction with the professor, and the act of note-taking. What else actually matters in a lecture and what tech could actually help that in the lecture hall? Maybe something like google moderator for huge class sizes would be useful? I'd say that being able to recall anything that happened in the lectures would be great, but even when I had access to recordings of a multi-campus class I took over a teleconferencing service I never used them.
And the note taking device doesn't really make a whole lot of difference, software can't (yet) automate the act of putting information into your brain. I did some classes with pen and paper, I did some by typing on a laptop, and a classmate used a laptop-that-rotates-into-touchscreen-and-stylus job; it's all just a matter of preference really.
That sounds like a particularly nasty mess right there, as most of the attacks originate from foreign soil.
This is terrible terrible news for the coffee shops of the world that offer free wifi.
Because if someone can break in, either the company broken into is completely incompetent at their own security, or the attacker is good enough to have the foresight required to not to launch an attack from their own network.
It's not that most of these guys are necessarily bad people, but hackers (in the DEFCON sense) do tend to follow alpha male mentality. Now mix that up with copious amounts of alcohol, the poor social adjustment that many geeks have, and the "anything goes" attitude of Sin City, and yeah you'll have problems.
My experience was that most attendee's poor social adjustment manifested as incredibly timid behavior. You know, just like any nerd-out-of-water ever.
The guy I went to Vegas with made it his mission (and I eventually joined him to a small extent) to spend the weekend pulling people out of their shells.
The logo itself is a status symbol.
I used to think this was just an insult to apple buyers. Then the iPhone 4s came out. I'll never forget the first words that came out of my apple buying friend's mouth after seeing the design. "How will anyone be able to tell I have the new one?"
Business is usually more concerned with people than technology.
Correct. High level businesspeople don't not care about social relations, statistically they're actually more likely than the general population to be psychopaths, and even when they're not diagnostically so, they make use of the same social toolbox as a psychopath.
Fix the families. Restore family values. Education and all other aspects of life will follow.
I agree that parents are the problem, they need to take a more active role in their children's education, but what are family values? And how are they going to fix the educational life of any child?
I'm not being sarcastic, I actually want to know what "restoring family value" means, because as far as I've been able to tell its a dog whistle term for other things, most of which don't have anything to do with parenting and the few that do are about sheltering children from sex. None of which does dogshit towards making kids care about their own education.
This is the core issue of network neutrality! A network provider should be a neutral network provider, it should not prioritise one vendor's service over another vendor's equivalent service
Yup, this really is the core of the issue. Now, its easy to understand why this exception they've given themselves seems to make sense, the problem is what it implies. A popular 'worst case' is that service providers can't just buy bandwidth and sling to all consumers limited only by the bandwidth they buy and the network path to the consumer. Now, with comcast pulling this, it will eventually be rightly called out as anti-compeptive, they will go to whatever authority calls them out hat-in-hand and say they just can't afford to pull all that data from an outside network, but offer to allow content providers unlimited access to their customers if the other provider does the legwork to get the traffic on comcast's "internal" network, now to "remain competitive" the Netflixs of the world have to start eating more and more costs as they rework their locations and their choice of upstream provider to conform with every consumer ISP whos customers they want to serve to get around artificial roadblocks erected by the ISP.
No it's because Schneier has a conflict-of-interest since he's a hostile party in an ongoing lawsuit against the TSA. It makes sense that he would be excluded.
Last year they were both able to testify, just in separate sessions.
Stop buying music and movies. Very simple!
But Congressman, my revenues are down! It must be piracy, people don't take principled stands!
at least there is a bit I admire from them and it's their independence. They are only pursuing the IPO because they are forced to, but Zuckerberg has attempted to keep things indie (huge indie but still indie) all this time.
Facebook stopped being indie years and years ago (issuing shares, taking VC cash). Since then its all been carefully managed image and branding. He was never forced to IPO, its just his chickens coming home to roost.
Are you trying to say ignorance of foreign issues and jingoism isn't a the best way to form opinions on international matters? You're such a communist.
The vast majority of people searching for santorum are searching for info about the candidate, not obscene material. If Google wants to provide useful search results, they will change the policy.
They don't need to change the policy. If its not what they're looking for, spreading santorum will start naturally falling in the results. The fact that its not falling is proof that people are searching for 'santorum' to get some laughs from Savage's page.
Because the documents were illegally obtained, still classified, and not authorized for disclosure.
And yet they still worked with the NYT to limit the data released.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. And if your particular project has your arduino always connected to a PC, this may be exactly what you want.
I'd heat water with it but have yet to find an effective and efficient means to do so with wood or paper.
Back when we had an electric hot water heater we just built a metal reservoir into our wood stove and plumbed it into line with the cold water feed to the heater. The heater still functioned normally, but whenever we were heating with wood the input water was already at temperature and the tank would only have to maintain (or slightly heat) the input water.
Its a start, and not hard to hack into your existing setup. What we had was pretty simple, but knocked a huge chunk from the electricity used by the heater. I don't think you'll find a good way to use paper/wood as the primary source of heat, but as a secondary that does most of the lifting you'll find a lot of options.
Why is it always sports fans that get special attention? What if I want to watch a live concert, lecture, or other non-sporting event?
You're not as reliable of a repeat customer, and you probably aren't willing to pay out the nose for content like sports fans are.
I've assumed that the US government has been intercepting all our communications since they first had the technical ability.
I look at this the same way I might view a person who said to me "I've always assumed that an invisible Bigfoot watches me whenever I masturbate".
Given the US government has given themselves the ability to perform wholesale monitoring of communications (Room 641A is the easiest proof to point to), we must also posit that there is an invisible Bigfoot, and that he frequently watches people masturbate.
No, its just interesting. The fact it isn't a rounder number makes it a curiosity of how they arrived at $27.63 exactly. Why not $27.50, or $27 or $28. What difference do those few cents in compensation make in the mind of the bill authors? Is it just the hourly wage of someone making $X a year where X is actually a round number? Was it chosen because of its point on the distribution curve of typical IT worker compensation? Did the sponsors of the bill sit late into the night, debating adding and removing provisions of the bill along with cents to and from the hourly rate cited? Does whoever paid congress for the bill pay their IT folk $27.64/hr?
should be demanding better, but then they go and try propping up something like the Simpsons for a couple decades because it's a safe bet for viewer share.
Y'know, I think that if The Simpsons was the worst kind of programming we had to deal with, I'd call it a victory. Sure they've lost their charm for a lot of people, but even if their comedic voice has changed it still is a decent show with amazing production value.
The FCC's directive is not to ensure the value of your stock. The FCC asked AT&T why the merger was good for consumers and AT&T wasn't able to provide a reasonable one.
As someone who recently came of voting age, its kind of jarring to see our government function like this. I'm used to seeing the public interest railroaded to benefit a corporate interest, a corporate interest railroaded to benefit a different corporate interest, but I've never seen the public interest held above a corporate interest like this. Hell, they didn't even decide anything and I'm excited to see this, I know they would be able to jam up the merger eventually, but right now they've just presenting findings.
Is this what democracy is supposed to look like? I fucking love it. Shit, even if government decisions continue to be against the public interest, I'd be psyched if they just had the balls to admit it with reports like this. That would be a huge step forward from the bullshit "someone is making money, therefore its good, fuck off" level of analysis I'm used to seeing.
You took the words from my mouth, the last few days the only impression I've been getting from AT&T is one of a crybaby.
My favorite part of TFA was Sprint's comment, they're basically using fancy words to point and laugh.
"Plastic, but not this type, paper not including newspaper, x glass but not y glass". Pain in the ass.
Really? Come on; how lazy can you get?
The city I live in started recycling pickup a month or so ago, I just put the recyclables list up on the fridge. Problem fucking solved.
You do realize that you're referring to the America government, right? How's that postal service working out for you?
Pretty well actually, too bad our congress is needlessly squeezing it dry to make up for gaps in the budget.
So you think assert() is a substitute for proper exception handling? Really?
In this case specific case, sure, why the hell not? Its DNS, and you've found that you're in an impossible state. What else are you supposed to do? Even if the process hasn't been compromised, by the nature of the assert you've failed and don't know how to recover. Do you want to keep on serving DNS, assuming the process is in a state where it is fine to keep on trucking? Or maybe enter a do-nothing failure mode, which is just as useful as going down hard, but with the added bonus that the process is experiencing unknown problems and you want to rely on it to contain itself properly.
And I didn't say it was a substitute for proper exception handling, just that you're going to let exceptions you haven't prepared for to bring the process down, rather than blindly swallowing them. Or do you think this is good code:
try:
foo()
except Exception, e:
pass # EVERYTHINGS FINE, GO BACK TO WORK!
bar()
The assertion is a problem.
Deployed code with asserts in it is crap, and would violate any contract I've worked to since 1995.
At least this was just teh interwebs that it broke. If it had been safety-related, someone would be ducking under their desk trying to call their lawyer.
So your code, that you make sound more important and/or safety related than DNS, doesn't have any failsafes? Really?