It really stems from the self-preservation instinct that is hard-wired into the human brain.
This "self-preservation instinct" you talk about is a proven falsity. Humans, as well as other animals, have a natural instinct to help each other out. I suggest you read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.
It takes courage to supress the flight instinct and put oneself harms way for the sake of others. This is why people such as firefighters, cops and good-sumaritans are considered heros, as opposed to just normal people.
It doesn't take courage to call 911 and call for help. It does take a knowledge of the situation which is going on if you want to have the best chance of correcting it.
Just don't try to conduct that study of yours on your own. Unless, that is, you want to find out if people will come to your aid when you call for help in jail.
I never intended to do that, nor do I suggest anyone else should, without first contacting the appropriate authorities to get permission.
I would do the same for someone calling out in distress, but experience has shown repeatedly (at least in the US) that many people will ignore it, or rationalize that someone else must be taking care of it.
This is counterintuitive to me. As such I'd only believe it if I saw the results of a study. It would be easy to perform the study, just have people randomly yell "fire", or "rape", or "help", or "help, he's trying to kill me", or "help, she's trying to kill me", or "Call 911", etc. Honestly, I find it hard to believe that "rape" or "help, he's trying to kill me" or maybe "Call 911" would get less of a response than "fire", though I could see how "help" or "help, she's trying to kill me" might be ignored.
Maybe you're right, but it's just not something I'm going to buy without seeing the results of a study.
I've heard it too, but I'm much more likely to run away from a fire, and toward a person in distress. I know it's a commonly believed, but that doesn't make it true.
I wonder if http://www.kpmg.com/?#define%20m(i)(x[i]^s[i+84])y )c+=y=i^i/8^i>>4^i>>12,i=i>>8^y& gt;14,y=a^a*8^a>8^y/n."[k>>4]*2^k*257/8,s [j]=k^(k&k*2&34)*6^c+~y;}} would be an illegal hyperlink... Yep, that's DeCSS...
Your point is still legitimate, especially when these new ignition systems have no effect on making insurance rates cheaper...
These systems almost certainly do make your insurance rates cheaper. The reason you don't notice is because it is a standard feature, so the price reduction is built into the rate system.
Anti-lock brakes are only a safety advantage if you don't know how to drive. For those of us who do know how to drive, they're actually a safety detriment.
Pardon my confusion, then. Since you used Java as an example (including Sun's tag-line), I (mis)assumed that you were talking about binary compatibility.
My fault at least as much if not more than yours...
I'm not talking about binary emulation. That would be silly since the underlying platform is the same.
Thinking about it some more, I'm not so sure it is silly. To get 90% of the way, all you really need is [....]
Again my problem with the english language, I believe (my native language is C, I guess). I meant that emulation, as in translating individual instructions, would be silly. The idea of relinking or dynamically linking was similar to the one you presented, although yours in some respects is much nicer because it doesn't require support of the application developer. It is essentially WINE in reverse though, and wine is not an emulator:).
OTOH, I'm not convinced that doing all of that would be particularly beneficial. Forcing a recompile or even just a relink makes it more likely that open-source software will be freely ported, and that proprietary software will be ported less so (you could even go so far as making the win32 libraries copylefted, but I think the GPL would be overboard so I wouldn't suggest that). Binary portability is really only useful IMO for software which exists in a proprietary state on Windows and which does not have a reasonable alternative on Linux (with the strong warning that my screwed up definition of non-proprietary includes freeware, not necessarly open-source). For everything else I think source level portability is acceptable.
Debian != Linux. Newsflash for all you/.ers. This article is about porting the Debian user space tools to Windows, or to the win32 runtime environment to be precise. That doesn't mean you can run a Linux binary on Windows - it means you can run a Linux shell script on Windows, because the programs the shell script tries to call will be there and will behave as expected.
I didn't say "compile once, run anywhere", I said "write once, run anywhere". Yes, running linux apps might require a recompile (I'm pretty sure they only require relinking, and even that can be done runtime through dlopen). In any case, porting Debian user space tools to Windows is a big part of the whole deal. With no decent package management tools available, cygwin is not accessible to those who are not in the know.
I'm not talking about binary emulation. That would be silly since the underlying platform is the same. I'm talking about relinking the same object code with different OS specific libraries. I'm going to have to try it, I guess. The only thing I'm not sure about is if there will be a problem with the formats (ELF, A.OUT, etc.).
Yes, this is not the part that Debian is working on, but others are (it's what cygwin is all about), and it's largely already done. It's still somewhat useless because the cygwin tools are all you have to manage the whole thing.
Some people want to run Windows and Linux. There are three major free options (I'm not counting VMWare). Dual boot, run linux apps on windows, or run windows apps on linux. Dual booting is pretty much done, but it sucks. Running windows apps on linux is something that will never be finished, because it relies on reverse engineering a moving target. Running linux apps on windows OTOH is quite possible. No reverse engineering needs to be done, because the source code to the linux kernel and standard libraries is open source.
It is a tool that has NOTHING to do with learning from someone who is standing in front of you.
Sounds like a nice way to have students answer random questions and give the teacher instant feedback on how many students understand. Kind of like "Who wants to be a millionaire" poll the audience, we had a system like this in my college physics class...
Why is outside internet access necessary during class hours in the first place? Give each classroom a fixed IP address gateway (10.A.B.1), and allow students access to that gateway to route to the internet as required for a particular class at a particular time. Sure, adjacent classrooms might get that access, if they happen to know the right IP address, but you could even have a quick little one-time password you give the class at the beginning of the period, if you want to add one more layer of "security".
I'm sure it wouldn't be very hard to write a few scripts to automate the whole process. How hard depends on the OS, of course.
Epson Stylus 440 Color, on Red Hat. I had it working at one point, but it stopped working a couple months ago and I've been too lazy to fix it. I'll try the #linuxhelp thing, but even with help this is no where near Windows 2000 where I just plug it in and when the dialog says "You just added an Epson Stylus 440 Color Printer" I click "OK".
Also, the printer is by no means the only example.
I was referring to middle school (since that's what the article is about), and elementary school (since that's what my mother teaches). My pure speculation is that college level teachers would have more preparation time and less actual teaching time (although TAs might take a lot of both away), as well as much higher pay. I don't really personally know any college professors though, whereas I know quite a few pre-college teachers.
Why would a user move when everything is being brought to them.
Because applications run natively will always be faster (even in theory), and less buggy (in application). Also, new driver support for old versions of Windows will eventually be dropped, so users will also switch because it's free.
If this allows users to stay on Windows 2000 (or XP or 98 or whatever they have) forever, and never have to upgrade, freedom has already won.
Why would anyone want to port an OS to another OS (don't start with "Windows is not an OS, please!")?
This is essentially what Sun did with Java. It didn't exactly work out, but debian has the advantages of 1) being free, and 2) being fast. Wouldn't it be great to have compiled software that you can write once and run anywhere?
When tools make it possible to run Windows software under Linux, it will make people switch to Linux, as they can still run there Windows software.
When tools makes it possible to run Linux software on Windows, it will make people switch to Linux becourse they will be familier with the software anyway.
And I agree with both. The only real reasons I can see for not using Linux instead of Windows is 1) interoperability, and 2) ease of use. Once you've gotten over these two hurdles, you're going to get a mass exodus out of Windows and into Linux. Both of the above (porting Windows apps to Linux and porting Linux apps to Windows) increase interoperability, and IMHO help Linux.
Teachers who dont work for the money and actually care about their job are the best teachers.
What teachers do you know who work for the money?
Other than the fact that just about all of them work for the money (if you stopped paying them, very few would continue working). But, what teachers do you know who work for the high pay?
There will be less teachers, but really better to have a few great teachers (it works in college) than have a bunch of crappy ones making kids drop out.
Colleges generally pay more money, so there goes that idea. If you think that hiring fewer teachers is the answer (I think this would only work if you made class optional, since a pre-college teacher's duty is also babysitting), then hire fewer teachers. You don't have to pay more or less, you could pay the same or more. Which to do depends on the particular situation.
At $30 000 a year over 4 years, using that $38.6M you could hire 320 more teachers. Add that on to the 1280 teachers and you get 1600 teachers. With 38 600 students you now only have 24 students per class rather than 30 per class. By adding more teachers, teachers have more time to spend on students. Is this better than a laptop for each student?
I'd say definately not, but I see how one's opinion could vary. In my mind, each student having a laptop is going to increase the teacher's effectiveness by leaps and bounds. Instead of (or more likely in addition to) having students raise their hands to answer questions, you can have them answer them on their laptop, and the teacher can instantly know what percentage of the class understands a topic (as opposed to judging this by the number of hands raised). Students who are having difficulty with a particular topic can be much more easily isolated.
To really answer your question though, you would need to know exactly what the problems are with the Maine school system. One person brought up more books. This might be an answer, but it also might be that Maine already has enough books. There might be a teacher shortage (I have no idea), in which case hiring more teachers or teacher's aides. Maybe the school system needs more metal detectors for all I know. But I highly doubt that paying the teachers more is going to solve very much if anything.
Slashdot Mirror
It really stems from the self-preservation instinct that is hard-wired into the human brain.
This "self-preservation instinct" you talk about is a proven falsity. Humans, as well as other animals, have a natural instinct to help each other out. I suggest you read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.
It takes courage to supress the flight instinct and put oneself harms way for the sake of others. This is why people such as firefighters, cops and good-sumaritans are considered heros, as opposed to just normal people.
It doesn't take courage to call 911 and call for help. It does take a knowledge of the situation which is going on if you want to have the best chance of correcting it.
Just don't try to conduct that study of yours on your own. Unless, that is, you want to find out if people will come to your aid when you call for help in jail.
I never intended to do that, nor do I suggest anyone else should, without first contacting the appropriate authorities to get permission.
The ? and anything following it is generally ignored by a web browser if the file is not a cgi program.
I would do the same for someone calling out in distress, but experience has shown repeatedly (at least in the US) that many people will ignore it, or rationalize that someone else must be taking care of it.
This is counterintuitive to me. As such I'd only believe it if I saw the results of a study. It would be easy to perform the study, just have people randomly yell "fire", or "rape", or "help", or "help, he's trying to kill me", or "help, she's trying to kill me", or "Call 911", etc. Honestly, I find it hard to believe that "rape" or "help, he's trying to kill me" or maybe "Call 911" would get less of a response than "fire", though I could see how "help" or "help, she's trying to kill me" might be ignored.
Maybe you're right, but it's just not something I'm going to buy without seeing the results of a study.
I've heard it too, but I'm much more likely to run away from a fire, and toward a person in distress. I know it's a commonly believed, but that doesn't make it true.
You're just saying that to to try to get me to have reverse psychology work on me.
I wonder if http://www.kpmg.com/?#define%20m(i)(x[i]^s[i+84])y )c+=y=i^i/8^i>>4^i>>12,i=i>>8^y& gt;14,y=a^a*8^a>8^y/n."[k>>4]*2^k*257/8,s [j]=k^(k&k*2&34)*6^c+~y;}} would be an illegal hyperlink... Yep, that's DeCSS...
Screaming 'fire' for ANY emergency is much more effective....people like to watch things burn.
Show me a single study which backs that up. I highly doubt it's true.
Your point is still legitimate, especially when these new ignition systems have no effect on making insurance rates cheaper...
These systems almost certainly do make your insurance rates cheaper. The reason you don't notice is because it is a standard feature, so the price reduction is built into the rate system.
Safety advances like anti-lock brakes
Anti-lock brakes are only a safety advantage if you don't know how to drive. For those of us who do know how to drive, they're actually a safety detriment.
My fault at least as much if not more than yours...
Again my problem with the english language, I believe (my native language is C, I guess). I meant that emulation, as in translating individual instructions, would be silly. The idea of relinking or dynamically linking was similar to the one you presented, although yours in some respects is much nicer because it doesn't require support of the application developer. It is essentially WINE in reverse though, and wine is not an emulator :).
OTOH, I'm not convinced that doing all of that would be particularly beneficial. Forcing a recompile or even just a relink makes it more likely that open-source software will be freely ported, and that proprietary software will be ported less so (you could even go so far as making the win32 libraries copylefted, but I think the GPL would be overboard so I wouldn't suggest that). Binary portability is really only useful IMO for software which exists in a proprietary state on Windows and which does not have a reasonable alternative on Linux (with the strong warning that my screwed up definition of non-proprietary includes freeware, not necessarly open-source). For everything else I think source level portability is acceptable.
Debian != Linux. Newsflash for all you /.ers. This article is about porting the Debian user space tools to Windows, or to the win32 runtime environment to be precise. That doesn't mean you can run a Linux binary on Windows - it means you can run a Linux shell script on Windows, because the programs the shell script tries to call will be there and will behave as expected.
I didn't say "compile once, run anywhere", I said "write once, run anywhere". Yes, running linux apps might require a recompile (I'm pretty sure they only require relinking, and even that can be done runtime through dlopen). In any case, porting Debian user space tools to Windows is a big part of the whole deal. With no decent package management tools available, cygwin is not accessible to those who are not in the know.
I'm not talking about binary emulation. That would be silly since the underlying platform is the same. I'm talking about relinking the same object code with different OS specific libraries. I'm going to have to try it, I guess. The only thing I'm not sure about is if there will be a problem with the formats (ELF, A.OUT, etc.).
Yes, this is not the part that Debian is working on, but others are (it's what cygwin is all about), and it's largely already done. It's still somewhat useless because the cygwin tools are all you have to manage the whole thing.
Some people want to run Windows and Linux. There are three major free options (I'm not counting VMWare). Dual boot, run linux apps on windows, or run windows apps on linux. Dual booting is pretty much done, but it sucks. Running windows apps on linux is something that will never be finished, because it relies on reverse engineering a moving target. Running linux apps on windows OTOH is quite possible. No reverse engineering needs to be done, because the source code to the linux kernel and standard libraries is open source.
then people would actually have to see the link...
Hahahahaha. Have fun when the FBI comes to your door and detains you as a material witness in a terrorist activity! You picked the wrong handle, man.
How are you? When I saw this internet link, I immediately thought about you I am in a harry (sic), I promise you will love it!
It is a tool that has NOTHING to do with learning from someone who is standing in front of you.
Sounds like a nice way to have students answer random questions and give the teacher instant feedback on how many students understand. Kind of like "Who wants to be a millionaire" poll the audience, we had a system like this in my college physics class...
Why is outside internet access necessary during class hours in the first place? Give each classroom a fixed IP address gateway (10.A.B.1), and allow students access to that gateway to route to the internet as required for a particular class at a particular time. Sure, adjacent classrooms might get that access, if they happen to know the right IP address, but you could even have a quick little one-time password you give the class at the beginning of the period, if you want to add one more layer of "security".
I'm sure it wouldn't be very hard to write a few scripts to automate the whole process. How hard depends on the OS, of course.
Epson Stylus 440 Color, on Red Hat. I had it working at one point, but it stopped working a couple months ago and I've been too lazy to fix it. I'll try the #linuxhelp thing, but even with help this is no where near Windows 2000 where I just plug it in and when the dialog says "You just added an Epson Stylus 440 Color Printer" I click "OK".
Also, the printer is by no means the only example.
I was referring to middle school (since that's what the article is about), and elementary school (since that's what my mother teaches). My pure speculation is that college level teachers would have more preparation time and less actual teaching time (although TAs might take a lot of both away), as well as much higher pay. I don't really personally know any college professors though, whereas I know quite a few pre-college teachers.
We've already broken rule #2.
I still can't get my printer to work on linux... Just one example of many.
How could they port something which is open source, onto a platform which is and always will be closed source.
Why run linux on x86 chips, which are closed source and always will be closed source?
Why would a user move when everything is being brought to them.
Because applications run natively will always be faster (even in theory), and less buggy (in application). Also, new driver support for old versions of Windows will eventually be dropped, so users will also switch because it's free.
If this allows users to stay on Windows 2000 (or XP or 98 or whatever they have) forever, and never have to upgrade, freedom has already won.
Why would anyone want to port an OS to another OS (don't start with "Windows is not an OS, please!")?
This is essentially what Sun did with Java. It didn't exactly work out, but debian has the advantages of 1) being free, and 2) being fast. Wouldn't it be great to have compiled software that you can write once and run anywhere?
When tools make it possible to run Windows software under Linux, it will make people switch to Linux, as they can still run there Windows software.
When tools makes it possible to run Linux software on Windows, it will make people switch to Linux becourse they will be familier with the software anyway.
And I agree with both. The only real reasons I can see for not using Linux instead of Windows is 1) interoperability, and 2) ease of use. Once you've gotten over these two hurdles, you're going to get a mass exodus out of Windows and into Linux. Both of the above (porting Windows apps to Linux and porting Linux apps to Windows) increase interoperability, and IMHO help Linux.
Teachers who dont work for the money and actually care about their job are the best teachers.
What teachers do you know who work for the money?
Other than the fact that just about all of them work for the money (if you stopped paying them, very few would continue working). But, what teachers do you know who work for the high pay?
There will be less teachers, but really better to have a few great teachers (it works in college) than have a bunch of crappy ones making kids drop out.
Colleges generally pay more money, so there goes that idea. If you think that hiring fewer teachers is the answer (I think this would only work if you made class optional, since a pre-college teacher's duty is also babysitting), then hire fewer teachers. You don't have to pay more or less, you could pay the same or more. Which to do depends on the particular situation.
At $30 000 a year over 4 years, using that $38.6M you could hire 320 more teachers. Add that on to the 1280 teachers and you get 1600 teachers. With 38 600 students you now only have 24 students per class rather than 30 per class. By adding more teachers, teachers have more time to spend on students. Is this better than a laptop for each student?
I'd say definately not, but I see how one's opinion could vary. In my mind, each student having a laptop is going to increase the teacher's effectiveness by leaps and bounds. Instead of (or more likely in addition to) having students raise their hands to answer questions, you can have them answer them on their laptop, and the teacher can instantly know what percentage of the class understands a topic (as opposed to judging this by the number of hands raised). Students who are having difficulty with a particular topic can be much more easily isolated.
To really answer your question though, you would need to know exactly what the problems are with the Maine school system. One person brought up more books. This might be an answer, but it also might be that Maine already has enough books. There might be a teacher shortage (I have no idea), in which case hiring more teachers or teacher's aides. Maybe the school system needs more metal detectors for all I know. But I highly doubt that paying the teachers more is going to solve very much if anything.