Plus the minute you start sharing things within a virtual machine (ie: apache, cgi-type middleware, database all on the same machine), you've just lost all "extra" security from virtualization. You may keep the top level OS "protected", but who cares, you've lost private data from your database, through a hole in apache(or whatever). OOoops....
The problem of security is slightly improved, if you run each thing on separate virtual machines on the same hardware. You should in theory get relatively fast interconnects. If you VM is any good, that is. But you're still losing efficiency, unless you're doing "zones" or something like that. And it's 3x the headache to manage 3 separate instances of OSs, for what is in effect just one top level system anyway.
When XP for tablets came out it was extremely clunky and far to large for the humble resources of a device loaded with low power chips and a slow (by desktop standards) HDD
It ran quite nice on the fujitsu stylistic.
very pricy though, comparatively speaking.
Offer an Android tablet, too. Come on, you're a $100 billion corporation and you can afford to develop two different platforms.
they dont have to "afford to" do that. They've already proven they dont have to: all they have to do is make the hardware available to the right people, and they'll make sure Android runs on it for free. What's not to like, from a corporate perspective?
At many bigger / better schools, teaching is a secondary activity for professors -- it's something that they're forced to do
and as you say, many of them suck at it.
Which is a reason in FAVOR of what I proposed. It gives pressure to ensure that the one professor that actually is recorded for the lecture, is Good At Giving Lectures.
Share how?
As I said: "khanacademy style". Pretty much "anyone" can watch them. they're publically online, "flash video" or whatever.
And as for your argument for a college degree becoming like as a hs diploma: no, you missed the whole point of the rigourously and strictly done testing.
A proper test will ensure that the person either truly knows the material, or they wont pass the course.
To the person who whined that this would "devalue Educators"... yeah, so what? sounds like you're a college professor attempting to justify your overpriced job.
To the person who whined about "hands on chemistry" going missing: so what? You dont need to get "hands on", to get a proper understanding of chemistry. you only need that, if you actually intend on pursuing a career that involves being a lab tech.
Many high school biology courses, now skip the messy disgusging hands on frog dissection, that was once thought "mandatory". it isnt. It in no way helps someone understand "a frogs heart goes (here)" any further than seeing it on a computer screen does.
You only "need" the hands-on dissection, if you actually are going to have a job dealing with messing with corpses, or potentially surgery.
PS: in the computer field, this in no way eliminates weekly computer assignments. Most of my upper-division CS course assignments were robo-graded.
You could even have them standardized and non-graded.
And nothing is STOPPING people taking the class, from collaborating together on their own time. Which is what they do anyway in a "normal" college.
Make the appropriate online community avenues available, and you're all set.
Err... you seem to be labelling anything that "could not happen, according to Science", to be "falsifiable", aka "faked". Which is another way of saying, you refuse to believe it could have happened, simply because "science says it cant happen".
To which I reply, that simply shows that you have "BLIND FAITH" in whatever "science" tells you can or cannot happen. Additionaly, I will remind you that "science" has a long and well-established history of being WRONG, over, and over again. It tends to get less wrong as time goes by. But it has not ever reached the point of "always true".
Also, you missed the point of the definition of "miracle". Which means "cannot happen according to the currently understood workings of the normal universe". The fact that "science" says these things cannot happen, is exactly the point people are making, that it points to a power outside "natural law". For you to say, "there is not and cannot be anything outside 'science', is, as I've pointed out, "blind faith in science", and makes you a bigot. An "anti-religious bigot", rather than a "religious bigot". But a bigot just the same.
Maybe there is some other way we could go about doing this.
This is a great thing to do, if you also make sure that the low cost educational avenues are met.
To do so, would be trivial. Even by "government program stupidity, which ensures at least 200% overhead.
95% of classes, involve sitting in lectures.
There is no reason to be paying thousands of professors in a field, to be teaching the same overall subject matter, but in thousands of slightly different and unique ways. The subject matter itself, is uniform.
khanacademy.org style: you record ONE person, doing a lecture series, and share with everyone. for miniscule incremental cost.
The only "must be fresh every time" required action, is verified testing of the individual in the class. 2-5 hours per class, per semester. Shove 20 people in a room, hire a person for a reasonable hourly rate... $20 an hour?
that's $1 per person per hour.
Add another $1 for room rental costs, etc.
$2x5 hours == $10 per class per semester.
There is NO REASON that base line college should cost more than this.
You want more handholding? fine, pay more. but for those who can handle the above scenario, there's no need to make them pay more than the above, to get their "piece of paper" enabling them to get a job.
You honestly think that you can educate at satisfactory university level for 3 or 4 years, at a price that is affordable to a tee/early 20s with minimum wage earning parent(s)?
Yes. It's trivial.
95% of classes, involve sitting in lectures.
There is no reason to be paying thousands of professors in a field, to be teaching the same overall subject matter, but in thousands of slightly different and unique ways. The subject matter itself, is uniform.
khanacademy.org : you record ONE person, doing a lecture series, and share with everyone. for miniscule incremental cost.
The only "must be fresh every time" required action, is verified testing of the individual in the class. 2-5 hours per class, per semester. Shove 20 people in a room, hire a person for a reasonable hourly rate... $20 an hour?
that's $1 per person per hour.
Add another $1 for room rental costs, etc.
$2x5 hours == $10 per class per semester.
There is NO REASON that base line college should cost more than this.
You want more handholding? fine, pay more. but for those who can handle the above scenario, there's no need to make them pay more than the above, to get their "piece of paper" enabling them to get a job.
A university education isn't for a particular job, it's for life.
No, it's not. It's just to get your first or second job, in a particular field.
5 years out of college, your degree is hardly relevant.
10 years out (and that means, 10 years of working experience) it's completely irrelevant.
I've been part of the hiring team. If someone has 10 years of experience, I dont give a bean what degree they have, or if they even have one.
90% of my college classes were completely irrelevant to my day job, and I actually have a degree that IS relevant to my day job.
The slashdot article throws in a reference to "the e-ink line".
The thing is, that's exactly what I want in a tablet: color e-ink. I dont want to play fast-screen-refresh games. I want a single device, that is *really really good* for reading stuff, and then the occasional thing like google maps, facebook, email, blah blah. that's what I use my iphone for. I'd like a bigger one. But no-one is offering this in e-ink. Arrg!
The picture of the kitty looks fake.
Looks more like under-lit glow lamp, rather than internal glow.
(ie: how exactly are its CLAWS glowing? I think not...)
There is a difference between "people who want to see it", and "people who are willing to PAY to see it".
I wonder if the various for-pay porn sites, are really finding huge revenue from people who are looking at porn when they "shouldnt", and are committing the additional stupidity of PAYING for this time of illicit viewing, rather than doing it at a safer time and location.
Are people REALLY THAT stupid? is a significant chunk of porn revenue really coming from people viewing porn at work against company policy?
The part which relies on (the goodness of human nature).
It works GREAT, if you manage to get a population that is 100% altruistic.
However, once you get any unsociable, selfish people in there, they start abusing the system.
At that point, you start needing "police". Whether that be simple, literal police, or "government".
The next inevitable step, is that the unsociable, selfish people say to themselves, "well, I cant abuse 'the system' easily any more, because 'the police' are in the way. So, do I suddenly start playing nice and equal with everyone? no dont be silly.. I know, i'll start to co-opt and corrupt 'the police' instead!"
At some point, you need some all powerful, non-replacable entity at the top to keep things clean, that no-one can corrupt or conquer.
Which is why some old mouldy philosopher said words to the effect of, "[it is crucial that we act as if there is a God, even if there isnt one; otherwise, society is doomed]"
Agreed, except a little fuziness on the "PC" part. I have an apple macbook:) Spent $10 for an adaptor, and now when I want to watch hulu-type services, I plug it into the HDMI port on my TV, and watch it that way. (sound and video over the single cable, if you have a non-ancient mac)
For other folks, investing in a 20' HDMI cable from their "desktop" computer would be all right, probably.
I find it absurd that companies are even bothering to limit consoles out of stuff like "hulu", when other computers, including laptops, are allowed. Have to laugh when I see the "we arent licensed to stream this to 'mobile' devices" licensing whine... so then I watch it anyway through my "mobile" laptop anyway.
Good point.. you gotta have games, to sell devices. What would be nice... but unlikely for sony to do.... would be to make an all-in-one. To declare that they are going to have one unified platform as their "next gaming platform". Thus, you would buy one game, and be able to play it mobile, or sitting in front of a big screen.
They could do it either with a docking station/cabling, OR have two platforms that are still compatible, kinda like iphone/ipad. Most things work on both.
This could be good in two ways: basic: A person who prefers one style of playing, could then pick their personal preference of "small portable" or "big screen setup", yet not miss out on the games fancy: If sony went the multiple-hardware route, but they were uncharacteristically nice, they could allow for transfer of a game between home and mobile platform.
Personally, I'd like the "single unit" approach. But I'm sure sony would prefer the "sell more hardware" approach.
But for anything more than "toy" games.. erm.. wait.. make that mindless games.. erm.. moving on...
the size of the screen on iphones is annoyingly small, particularly since it will then be obscured by my FINGER on it most of the time. A poster below has a halfway good idea with suggestion of adding phone capability to the DS. but.. the res is lame 400x240 for 3ds, compared to iphone: Old 3gs: 480x320 4: 960x640
What would be really compelling, would be a high res display but with actual side buttons to preserve screen real estate. Plus phone capability, of course. If only some manufacturer would figure that out... oh that's right, Sony has. But they're not releasing anything for another 6 months. SIGH....
PS Vita: 960x544 res, and all the other goodies. Supposedly march 2012. (MAAAYBE Christmas for Japan) On the bright side: targetted for $250. Bye-bye, 3DS.
Aw nuts, you had the fun version then.. I was totally robbed!
sounds like in some ways, the biggest benefit to you was the location, really. I got the improved classroom experience, just by being sent to a good private school. Sorry old chap...
The problem with this mostly pie-in-the-sky article, is that it presumes linear increases with iteration. But the data he is working on, was a one-time thing: his experience with being seen as "smarter" than his peers, because of computer learning.
The thing is, that isnt anything special to a computer. That's just the result of what is effectively a "personal tutor". but if you keep doing it, you dont get the same amount of increase per "loop". You just gradually approach the maximum potential of the human individual. (in an asymptotic fashion)
So, this article isnt completely useless; it has some value, in that it reminds us that if we focused more on getting children onto computerized, individual-paced learning that actually INTERESTED them, we could almost eliminate the problem with public schools producing so many ignorant people.
is one example of what is needed, rather than more union-protected incompetent idiots teaching children. (yes, there are some good teachers in public schools, but the bad ones destroy more than the good create)
Slashdot Mirror
True.
Plus the minute you start sharing things within a virtual machine
(ie: apache, cgi-type middleware, database all on the same machine), you've just lost all "extra" security from virtualization. You may keep the top level OS "protected", but who cares, you've lost private data from your database, through a hole in apache(or whatever). OOoops....
The problem of security is slightly improved, if you run each thing on separate virtual machines on the same hardware. You should in theory get relatively fast interconnects. If you VM is any good, that is. But you're still losing efficiency, unless you're doing "zones" or something like that.
And it's 3x the headache to manage 3 separate instances of OSs, for what is in effect just one top level system anyway.
When XP for tablets came out it was extremely clunky and far to large for the humble resources of a device loaded with low power chips and a slow (by desktop standards) HDD
It ran quite nice on the fujitsu stylistic. very pricy though, comparatively speaking.
Offer an Android tablet, too. Come on, you're a $100 billion corporation and you can afford to develop two different platforms.
they dont have to "afford to" do that. They've already proven they dont have to: all they have to do is make the hardware available to the right people, and they'll make sure Android runs on it for free. What's not to like, from a corporate perspective?
At many bigger / better schools, teaching is a secondary activity for professors -- it's something that they're forced to do
and as you say, many of them suck at it. Which is a reason in FAVOR of what I proposed. It gives pressure to ensure that the one professor that actually is recorded for the lecture, is Good At Giving Lectures.
Share how?
As I said: "khanacademy style". Pretty much "anyone" can watch them. they're publically online, "flash video" or whatever. And as for your argument for a college degree becoming like as a hs diploma: no, you missed the whole point of the rigourously and strictly done testing. A proper test will ensure that the person either truly knows the material, or they wont pass the course.
To the person who whined that this would "devalue Educators"... yeah, so what? sounds like you're a college professor attempting to justify your overpriced job.
To the person who whined about "hands on chemistry" going missing: so what? You dont need to get "hands on", to get a proper understanding of chemistry. you only need that, if you actually intend on pursuing a career that involves being a lab tech.
Many high school biology courses, now skip the messy disgusging hands on frog dissection, that was once thought "mandatory". it isnt. It in no way helps someone understand "a frogs heart goes (here)" any further than seeing it on a computer screen does. You only "need" the hands-on dissection, if you actually are going to have a job dealing with messing with corpses, or potentially surgery.
PS: in the computer field, this in no way eliminates weekly computer assignments. Most of my upper-division CS course assignments were robo-graded. You could even have them standardized and non-graded. And nothing is STOPPING people taking the class, from collaborating together on their own time. Which is what they do anyway in a "normal" college. Make the appropriate online community avenues available, and you're all set.
Err... you seem to be labelling anything that "could not happen, according to Science", to be "falsifiable", aka "faked".
Which is another way of saying, you refuse to believe it could have happened, simply because "science says it cant happen".
To which I reply, that simply shows that you have "BLIND FAITH" in whatever "science" tells you can or cannot happen.
Additionaly, I will remind you that "science" has a long and well-established history of being WRONG, over, and over again.
It tends to get less wrong as time goes by. But it has not ever reached the point of "always true".
Also, you missed the point of the definition of "miracle". Which means "cannot happen according to the currently understood workings of the normal universe".
The fact that "science" says these things cannot happen, is exactly the point people are making, that it points to a power outside "natural law".
For you to say, "there is not and cannot be anything outside 'science', is, as I've pointed out, "blind faith in science", and makes you a bigot. An "anti-religious bigot", rather than a "religious bigot". But a bigot just the same.
Maybe there is some other way we could go about doing this.
This is a great thing to do, if you also make sure that the low cost educational avenues are met. To do so, would be trivial. Even by "government program stupidity, which ensures at least 200% overhead.
95% of classes, involve sitting in lectures. There is no reason to be paying thousands of professors in a field, to be teaching the same overall subject matter, but in thousands of slightly different and unique ways. The subject matter itself, is uniform.
khanacademy.org style: you record ONE person, doing a lecture series, and share with everyone. for miniscule incremental cost.
The only "must be fresh every time" required action, is verified testing of the individual in the class. 2-5 hours per class, per semester. Shove 20 people in a room, hire a person for a reasonable hourly rate... $20 an hour? that's $1 per person per hour. Add another $1 for room rental costs, etc. $2x5 hours == $10 per class per semester. There is NO REASON that base line college should cost more than this.
You want more handholding? fine, pay more. but for those who can handle the above scenario, there's no need to make them pay more than the above, to get their "piece of paper" enabling them to get a job.
You honestly think that you can educate at satisfactory university level for 3 or 4 years, at a price that is affordable to a tee/early 20s with minimum wage earning parent(s)?
Yes. It's trivial. 95% of classes, involve sitting in lectures. There is no reason to be paying thousands of professors in a field, to be teaching the same overall subject matter, but in thousands of slightly different and unique ways. The subject matter itself, is uniform.
khanacademy.org : you record ONE person, doing a lecture series, and share with everyone. for miniscule incremental cost.
The only "must be fresh every time" required action, is verified testing of the individual in the class. 2-5 hours per class, per semester. Shove 20 people in a room, hire a person for a reasonable hourly rate... $20 an hour? that's $1 per person per hour. Add another $1 for room rental costs, etc. $2x5 hours == $10 per class per semester. There is NO REASON that base line college should cost more than this.
You want more handholding? fine, pay more. but for those who can handle the above scenario, there's no need to make them pay more than the above, to get their "piece of paper" enabling them to get a job.
A university education isn't for a particular job, it's for life.
No, it's not. It's just to get your first or second job, in a particular field. 5 years out of college, your degree is hardly relevant. 10 years out (and that means, 10 years of working experience) it's completely irrelevant.
I've been part of the hiring team. If someone has 10 years of experience, I dont give a bean what degree they have, or if they even have one.
90% of my college classes were completely irrelevant to my day job, and I actually have a degree that IS relevant to my day job.
When is sshd in html5 coming, then?
agreed
http://blog.crashspace.org/2011/03/the-carmack-prize/ claims,
"you dont need an unrestricted GPS"
Wake me when one of the "private" space outfits finally puts a human being in space.
As the soviets showed with Laika in 1954: putting someone UP there, is easy. It's the "getting down safely" part that's difficult.
The slashdot article throws in a reference to "the e-ink line".
The thing is, that's exactly what I want in a tablet: color e-ink.
I dont want to play fast-screen-refresh games. I want a single device, that is *really really good* for reading stuff, and then the occasional thing like google maps, facebook, email, blah blah.
that's what I use my iphone for. I'd like a bigger one.
But no-one is offering this in e-ink. Arrg!
and we are.. "The knights who say NIH!!!"
(Not Invented Here)
as far as rejecting ECMAscript 4
The picture of the kitty looks fake. Looks more like under-lit glow lamp, rather than internal glow. (ie: how exactly are its CLAWS glowing? I think not...)
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
There is a difference between "people who want to see it", and "people who are willing to PAY to see it".
I wonder if the various for-pay porn sites, are really finding huge revenue from people who are looking at porn when they "shouldnt", and are committing the additional stupidity of PAYING for this time of illicit viewing, rather than doing it at a safer time and location.
Are people REALLY THAT stupid? is a significant chunk of porn revenue really coming from people viewing porn at work against company policy?
So which part of communism "can't work" then?
The part which relies on (the goodness of human nature).
It works GREAT, if you manage to get a population that is 100% altruistic.
However, once you get any unsociable, selfish people in there, they start abusing the system. At that point, you start needing "police". Whether that be simple, literal police, or "government".
The next inevitable step, is that the unsociable, selfish people say to themselves, "well, I cant abuse 'the system' easily any more, because 'the police' are in the way. So, do I suddenly start playing nice and equal with everyone? no dont be silly.. I know, i'll start to co-opt and corrupt 'the police' instead!"
At some point, you need some all powerful, non-replacable entity at the top to keep things clean, that no-one can corrupt or conquer. Which is why some old mouldy philosopher said words to the effect of, "[it is crucial that we act as if there is a God, even if there isnt one; otherwise, society is doomed]"
It's the only way to be sure
Agreed, except a little fuziness on the "PC" part. :)
I have an apple macbook
Spent $10 for an adaptor, and now when I want to watch hulu-type services, I plug it into the HDMI port on my TV, and watch it that way.
(sound and video over the single cable, if you have a non-ancient mac)
For other folks, investing in a 20' HDMI cable from their "desktop" computer would be all right, probably.
I find it absurd that companies are even bothering to limit consoles out of stuff like "hulu", when other computers, including laptops, are allowed.
Have to laugh when I see the "we arent licensed to stream this to 'mobile' devices" licensing whine... so then I watch it anyway through my "mobile" laptop anyway.
Good point.. you gotta have games, to sell devices.
What would be nice... but unlikely for sony to do.... would be to make an all-in-one.
To declare that they are going to have one unified platform as their "next gaming platform". Thus, you would buy one game, and be able to play it mobile, or sitting in front of a big screen.
They could do it either with a docking station/cabling, OR have two platforms that are still compatible, kinda like iphone/ipad. Most things work on both.
This could be good in two ways:
basic: A person who prefers one style of playing, could then pick their personal preference of "small portable" or "big screen setup", yet not miss out on the games
fancy: If sony went the multiple-hardware route, but they were uncharacteristically nice, they could allow for transfer of a game between home and mobile platform.
Personally, I'd like the "single unit" approach. But I'm sure sony would prefer the "sell more hardware" approach.
But for anything more than "toy" games.. erm.. wait.. make that mindless games.. erm.. moving on...
the size of the screen on iphones is annoyingly small, particularly since it will then be obscured by my FINGER on it most of the time.
A poster below has a halfway good idea with suggestion of adding phone capability to the DS. but.. the res is lame
400x240 for 3ds, compared to iphone:
Old 3gs: 480x320
4: 960x640
What would be really compelling, would be a high res display but with actual side buttons to preserve screen real estate. Plus phone capability, of course.
If only some manufacturer would figure that out... oh that's right, Sony has. But they're not releasing anything for another 6 months. SIGH....
PS Vita: 960x544 res, and all the other goodies. Supposedly march 2012. (MAAAYBE Christmas for Japan)
On the bright side: targetted for $250.
Bye-bye, 3DS.
and, while not fewer characters, "sudo -s" is even more appropriate, and simpler.
Aw nuts, you had the fun version then.. I was totally robbed!
sounds like in some ways, the biggest benefit to you was the location, really. I got the improved classroom experience, just by being sent to a good private school. Sorry old chap...
The problem with this mostly pie-in-the-sky article, is that it presumes linear increases with iteration. But the data he is working on, was a one-time thing: his experience with being seen as "smarter" than his peers, because of computer learning.
The thing is, that isnt anything special to a computer. That's just the result of what is effectively a "personal tutor".
but if you keep doing it, you dont get the same amount of increase per "loop". You just gradually approach the maximum potential of the human individual. (in an asymptotic fashion)
So, this article isnt completely useless; it has some value, in that it reminds us that if we focused more on getting children onto computerized, individual-paced learning that actually INTERESTED them, we could almost eliminate the problem with public schools producing so many ignorant people.
This is relevant to the other slashdot article today:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/07/25/1348228/Gates-Not-Much-To-Show-For-5B-Spent-On-Education
The article it links to,
http://www.fastcompany.com/1728471/change-generation-bill-gates-favorite-teacher-wants-to-disrupt-education
is one example of what is needed, rather than more union-protected incompetent idiots teaching children.
(yes, there are some good teachers in public schools, but the bad ones destroy more than the good create)