But, as I said, you don't seem to be any more capable at reading comprehension than you are at capitalization.
but since clearly not smart enough to extract the problem i'm implying,...
Is there a reason you have a problem with clearly stating anything other than insults?
Like I keep saying, be specific. Can you do that?
its that the students are only getting 4 hours of instruction a day which isn't enough
and
the only ones doing a good job are the ones that actually have a passion for just teaching
So you claim that the school day is not long enough... but that does not matter because there are not enough good teachers to teach the students in the first place.
And yet other students manage to master basic concepts such as capitalization under those exact conditions.
In fact, as others have posted, the states with the unions seem to do better on the standardized tests than non-union states.
now shut the fuck up and go back to grammar school.
You really do not grasp the magnitude of the humor in that statement coming from someone who fails basic capitalization. All the better because I'm sure it was unintended.
and no, both of us understand capitalization. one of us just isn't so damn pretentious that he needs to make himself feel superior by insulting someone else's lack of capitalization.
I have no need to make myself feel superior. I just am. Which is why I find it so amusing that someone demanding that teachers be fired cannot use correct punctuation when trying to support their position.
It is hilarious.
And you still have not identified the problem. How is it "substandard"? Specifically. You don't know what the word "specifically" means, do you? You fail capitalization and reading comprehension. Here, I'll help you out. From TFA:
...whoever could build a vehicle capable of taking off from earth, flying a three-person crew 100 kilometers above the planetâ(TM)s surface, returning to ground â" and then repeating the mission within two weeks.
That is specific.
All you have is your claim about "substandard" and your demand that the "fix" include firing teachers.
To repeat myself, it looks like you are more concerned with firing teachers than with identifying any real problem OR working on any plan to deal with the problem.
Since you want to go back to a business analogy, that would be comparable to the business is unprofitable and nearing bankruptcy.
No. THAT would be the point I've been making all along. You have to identify the problem FIRST. In that example, the problem is that the business will be bankrupt... in a certain time frame.
Right now you have not been able to identify the problem in the education system.
The entire education system is screwed up.
How? Aside from the fact that you want to be able to fire certain teachers? How is is "screwed up"?
Why the hell you would defend keeping bad teachers is incomprehensible.
I'm not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that you're using a "dog whistle". You cannot describe the problem in any specific terms. But you KNOW that the "plan" MUST include a way to get rid of certain teachers.
I've demonstrated that that approach does not make any sense in this context. It's backwards.
Suppose I'm setting up a web site for a business. The FIRST thing we discuss is NOT how to get rid of "bad programmers".
If I go into an existing business because they're having "problems" with their systems the FIRST thing we discuss is the exact nature of the "problems" they're having.
How to "get rid of bad" employees is NOT part of that discussion.
Yet it keeps popping up in these "education" discussions because it is a dog whistle. It makes no sense in context.
If you're on the high school football team you practice football after school with a coach dedicated to improving your skills.
Where's the after school coach for math? If you have a tutor it is usually to bring you up to the level of the other students. Not to help you become better than the math students in other schools.
Yet someone skilled in moving a ball down a field gets paid a LOT more than someone skilled in math.
You're going to have to specify what you mean by "unions" being the problem.
Parents can cause problems by not providing a stable home environment and emphasis on learning. Or parents can help by providing those. So "parents" being a "problem"... again, you have to specify what you mean.
But first off, someone needs to define the "problem". What, exactly, needs to be improved? Are there other countries that are doing better? If so, what are their approaches?
Unless there is a MAJOR breakthrough with getting mass into orbit.
It is unlikely that a criminal will have any skills you'd need that would be worth the expense of lifting him into orbit and keeping him fed and watered and breathing.
Because you will have TWICE the ability to obscure any abuses.
Was it the government oversight bureau that was responsible? (no)
Was it the private company that was responsible? (no)
Because the company will have been found to have been acting on guidelines from the government that were written with incorrect input from the company that was based upon a faulty understanding of the government's requirements. Systemic errors were found that will be addressed at the next board meeting with the government regulators.
Meanwhile, the company hires lobbyists to ensure that no matter who is voted in they will still be dependent upon the "campaign contributions" of the company.
Many DIFFERENT items go into a modern email system.
Tomlinson "invented" the practice of using the @ sign.
Ayyadurai may have been the first person to use the term "email". But there is no evidence that he invented the concept of electronic messages between people.
In such a scenario outlined by the submission where you don't have a project manager, is there any software in which developers or technicians can help budget time against tasks and create a visual representation?
Sure. Microsoft Project. But it won't work.
The problem is management, not software.
The developers will have to spend some of their time updating the charts.........
But the real problem will be that management can "work" the numbers so that their goals LOOK like they'll be met on the charts.
Then the developers will have to explain to management why they aren't hitting their deliverables at those milestones. The software says that they should be doing it.
So the developers will have to spend more time updating the software to show why they're behind.
And the cycle continues.
Someone at the management level needs to be able to say "No, we don't have funding" even for the "little" projects and "minor" changes. Otherwise the other projects will all slip.
But it's okay if Project X slips a week, right? As long as I get my project (which won't take any time at all I'm sure) along side it, right?
Maybe if we just change this "works 8 hours a day" to "works 8.5 hours a day". There! The software says that it can be done!
Or get a manager that can get the priorities / resources changed.
Something isn't working at your company. If upper management is setting their expectations too high (or not providing the resources to meet those expectations) then someone needs to explain that to them.
So you're walking through the business district of a city and just jiggling door knobs to see if anyone left anything unlocked.
Why? Because you're a "white hat".
That's the FIRST issue that you have to get through to the judge.
Once you find an open door, you go inside and take some important stuff out. So that you can prove to the company that you were inside.
That's the SECOND issue you have to get through to the judge.
Then, you call the company and tell them that door X is unlocked and you can prove it because you have property Y.
The company (being unenlightened and still thinking in physical world terms) calls the cops and you are arrested. Even though you intended to give property Y back to the company.
It makes sense that way.
So, do NOT freelance. If you do NOT have a signed contract with the company you CAN be prosecuted. You have to put in the EXTRA EFFORT to distinguish your actions from the actions of the bad guys. A signed contract does that.
Possibly. But if that was the case, that guy should either have known it was a trap for them or not have been able to see it at all.
In my experience, the problem with network security is getting management to understand anything about it other than "I don't want to have to remember a password".
Seems to me multiple windows is more of a bug than a feature.
For you, maybe. Not for everyone.
I prefer multiple monitors with multiple windows on each monitor. And none of them maximized.
And not to sound like an old fart, but let's not forget that up until the mid 80's most computers barely had any multi-tasking at all, let alone multiple windows.
Yeah. It's 2012 now.
I don't agree with those design changes. I don't see the advantage of trying to copy a single interface from the most limited systems to all systems. Particularly ones without the limitations of the systems that drove those restrictions in the first place.
All internal systems should use the internal DNS server. The firewalls should block any outgoing DNS queries from any systems (except the internal DNS servers). The firewall logs should be checked each day for violations. The internal DNS server logs should be checked each day for unusual activity.
Even if you cannot prevent your systems from being compromised you should be looking for the signs that they are compromised.
Slashdot Mirror
The Green Leopard Plague
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green_Leopard_Plague
By Walter Jon Williams
And yet I can correctly predict that you don't like unions. Seems that you are the one that does not understand what a "dog whistle" is.
Well your education has obviously been substandard. You cannot even handle capitalization.
Yet there are hundreds of people posting on /. that appear to be able to handle basic punctuation. So your failure does not seem to be the norm.
So what, specifically, is the problem with the education system? Specifically. Look that word up if you need to.
Oooooh, this is going to hurt.
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2719455&cid=39320903Looks like I did post that.
But, as I said, you don't seem to be any more capable at reading comprehension than you are at capitalization.
Is there a reason you have a problem with clearly stating anything other than insults?
Like I keep saying, be specific. Can you do that?
and
So you claim that the school day is not long enough ... but that does not matter because there are not enough good teachers to teach the students in the first place.
And yet other students manage to master basic concepts such as capitalization under those exact conditions.
In fact, as others have posted, the states with the unions seem to do better on the standardized tests than non-union states.
You really do not grasp the magnitude of the humor in that statement coming from someone who fails basic capitalization. All the better because I'm sure it was unintended.
Well, that would have been an awesome reply when you were five. But if you want to play in the adult world you're going to have to do a bit better.
You don't like teachers' unions. I get that. Dog whistle and all.
Or punctuation or capitalization.
And yet you want to argue about education.
I have no need to make myself feel superior. I just am. Which is why I find it so amusing that someone demanding that teachers be fired cannot use correct punctuation when trying to support their position.
It is hilarious.
And you still have not identified the problem. How is it "substandard"? Specifically. You don't know what the word "specifically" means, do you? You fail capitalization and reading comprehension. Here, I'll help you out. From TFA:
That is specific.
All you have is your claim about "substandard" and your demand that the "fix" include firing teachers.
To repeat myself, it looks like you are more concerned with firing teachers than with identifying any real problem OR working on any plan to deal with the problem.
Dog
Whistle
That's what "dog whistle" means. You substitute your bias for what is actually being discussed.
That is why you cannot explain the problem.
That is why you keep trying to focus on the dog whistle.
Again, that's the dog whistle. You KNOW what you are talking about ... but you cannot state it in any way except to repeat the dog whistle.
What, specifically, is the problem?
You cannot identify because you are focused on the dog whistle. Otherwise you'd be able to state it before now.
And the best part is that one of us understands capitalization and one of us does not.
I bet you even went to brick and mortar stores to buy such games.
My favorite was "Nybbles and Bytes" across from the Tacoma mall. I was sad when they closed.
No. THAT would be the point I've been making all along. You have to identify the problem FIRST. In that example, the problem is that the business will be bankrupt ... in a certain time frame.
Right now you have not been able to identify the problem in the education system.
How? Aside from the fact that you want to be able to fire certain teachers? How is is "screwed up"?
I'm not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that you're using a "dog whistle".
You cannot describe the problem in any specific terms.
But you KNOW that the "plan" MUST include a way to get rid of certain teachers.
I've demonstrated that that approach does not make any sense in this context. It's backwards.
Getting rid of "bad teachers" is a dog whistle.
Suppose I'm setting up a web site for a business.
The FIRST thing we discuss is NOT how to get rid of "bad programmers".
If I go into an existing business because they're having "problems" with their systems the FIRST thing we discuss is the exact nature of the "problems" they're having.
How to "get rid of bad" employees is NOT part of that discussion.
Yet it keeps popping up in these "education" discussions because it is a dog whistle. It makes no sense in context.
So X (what is wrong with education here) has not been defined ... ...
Which means that a plan to fix X is sort of impossible at this point
But you've already determined that there needs to be a way of "weeding out the bad teachers" in the plan.
Sounds to me that your REAL goal is "weeding out" some teachers. And then basing a "plan" around that.
How about we stick to finding X first?
What, specifically, is WRONG with education today?
Is any other country doing it better? How?
If you're on the high school football team you practice football after school with a coach dedicated to improving your skills.
Where's the after school coach for math? If you have a tutor it is usually to bring you up to the level of the other students. Not to help you become better than the math students in other schools.
Yet someone skilled in moving a ball down a field gets paid a LOT more than someone skilled in math.
You're going to have to specify what you mean by "unions" being the problem.
Parents can cause problems by not providing a stable home environment and emphasis on learning. Or parents can help by providing those. So "parents" being a "problem" ... again, you have to specify what you mean.
But first off, someone needs to define the "problem".
What, exactly, needs to be improved?
Are there other countries that are doing better?
If so, what are their approaches?
Unless there is a MAJOR breakthrough with getting mass into orbit.
It is unlikely that a criminal will have any skills you'd need that would be worth the expense of lifting him into orbit and keeping him fed and watered and breathing.
Very similar and also from that time period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Avenger_(character)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Rhodan
And most of his work is available via Gutenberg.
Because you will have TWICE the ability to obscure any abuses.
Was it the government oversight bureau that was responsible? (no)
Was it the private company that was responsible? (no)
Because the company will have been found to have been acting on guidelines from the government that were written with incorrect input from the company that was based upon a faulty understanding of the government's requirements. Systemic errors were found that will be addressed at the next board meeting with the government regulators.
Meanwhile, the company hires lobbyists to ensure that no matter who is voted in they will still be dependent upon the "campaign contributions" of the company.
Many DIFFERENT items go into a modern email system.
Tomlinson "invented" the practice of using the @ sign.
Ayyadurai may have been the first person to use the term "email".
But there is no evidence that he invented the concept of electronic messages between people.
Sure. Microsoft Project. But it won't work.
The problem is management, not software.
The developers will have to spend some of their time updating the charts .........
But the real problem will be that management can "work" the numbers so that their goals LOOK like they'll be met on the charts.
Then the developers will have to explain to management why they aren't hitting their deliverables at those milestones. The software says that they should be doing it.
So the developers will have to spend more time updating the software to show why they're behind.
And the cycle continues.
Someone at the management level needs to be able to say "No, we don't have funding" even for the "little" projects and "minor" changes. Otherwise the other projects will all slip.
But it's okay if Project X slips a week, right? As long as I get my project (which won't take any time at all I'm sure) along side it, right?
Maybe if we just change this "works 8 hours a day" to "works 8.5 hours a day". There! The software says that it can be done!
Why are all the projects slipping again?
Or get a manager that can get the priorities / resources changed.
Something isn't working at your company. If upper management is setting their expectations too high (or not providing the resources to meet those expectations) then someone needs to explain that to them.
So you're walking through the business district of a city and just jiggling door knobs to see if anyone left anything unlocked.
Why? Because you're a "white hat".
That's the FIRST issue that you have to get through to the judge.
Once you find an open door, you go inside and take some important stuff out. So that you can prove to the company that you were inside.
That's the SECOND issue you have to get through to the judge.
Then, you call the company and tell them that door X is unlocked and you can prove it because you have property Y.
The company (being unenlightened and still thinking in physical world terms) calls the cops and you are arrested. Even though you intended to give property Y back to the company.
It makes sense that way.
So, do NOT freelance. If you do NOT have a signed contract with the company you CAN be prosecuted. You have to put in the EXTRA EFFORT to distinguish your actions from the actions of the bad guys. A signed contract does that.
NSFW for language
http://www.oglaf.com/relief/
They've identified that there MAY be a problem.
But they haven't identified the source of the problem.
Is it a certain make/model of Toyota?
Is it a certain rotor from a manufacturer that is in different makes/models?
Is it user error?
Until they identify the source (sources?) of the problem then they cannot say that X is "broken". Because X seems to work in 998 out of 1,000 cases.
So what is the difference between the 998 cases and the 2 cases?
Suppose someone checks thousands of cars and finds that 998 out of every thousand cars checked had good, working brakes.
But 2 out of every thousand cars checked had bad brakes.
Is the braking system on cars broken?
Or do we need to find out how and why those particular cars have problems? I vote for this one.
Possibly. But if that was the case, that guy should either have known it was a trap for them or not have been able to see it at all.
In my experience, the problem with network security is getting management to understand anything about it other than "I don't want to have to remember a password".
For you, maybe. Not for everyone.
I prefer multiple monitors with multiple windows on each monitor. And none of them maximized.
Yeah. It's 2012 now.
I don't agree with those design changes. I don't see the advantage of trying to copy a single interface from the most limited systems to all systems. Particularly ones without the limitations of the systems that drove those restrictions in the first place.
All internal systems should use the internal DNS server.
The firewalls should block any outgoing DNS queries from any systems (except the internal DNS servers).
The firewall logs should be checked each day for violations.
The internal DNS server logs should be checked each day for unusual activity.
Even if you cannot prevent your systems from being compromised you should be looking for the signs that they are compromised.