Hey, maybe when the Chinese internet turns into the Chinese LAN, they can have huge Chinese LAN parties! Of course, these LAN parties will have to be harmonized by the government and consist of 72 hours of back to back dota, counter-strike, and wow. Coincidentally, the Chinese government is also interested in recruiting new operators for their virtual soldiers.
The Chinese cannot have LAN parties because there's only one party allowed, the communist party.
False. Other parties are allowed, they just can't take opposition political stances or compete with the CCP in elections. If your LAN party was gonna do those things, then that's one boring-ass LAN party.
What was up with Poland, seriously? We always learned in high school that they did it to get to France.
Then your high school teachers were serious dipshits. Germany had a historic claim to parts of Poland based on them having been German (mostly Prussian) territory. Russia had a similar claim based on having long ago conquered the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, which became free after the Russian revolution.
No more slashdotting articles with more than three sentence fragments masquerading as full sentences, or from "writers" who don't know the basic mechanics of the language.
This was of course just an example but it's true for a lot of stuff, back then you had to spend a lot more time optimizing your code as well, these days premature optimization is generally considered a bad thing (since in most cases it ends up being a waste of $500 worth of programmer time to squeeze out a performance gain that $50 in hardware would've have gotten you.
If you're planning to sell a million units containing both hardware and software, then "wasting" $500 of programmer time to save even $0.01 in hardware per unit is a really sweet deal.
You can tell GP is also of the "math isn't important" camp.
Professor Gray thinks children are not mentally wired for the kind of formal math instruction that is taught in schools, and that we'd be better served by putting off the teaching of theory until the seventh grade.
Or maybe children are told that math is hard and they're bad at it, and we'd be better served by putting off that message until the seventh grade (by which point they're truly rebellious and it will only spur them to try harder).
Computers are tools, nothing more. they exist to allow humans to do tasks that we otherwise can't do, or at least can't do easily. As such they should be as easy and accessible for an average person to use. Ideally they would require no training and be usable by even extremely mentally challenged individuals. The more we can simplify them, the better. They should be adapted to work how we want, we should not have to adapt to them.
Well guess what? Programming is another part of that. Ideally, we'd have computers that could more or less program themselves.
Cars are tools, nothing more. They exist to allow humans to do tasks that we otherwise can't do, or at least can't do easily. Ideally they would require no training and be usable by even extremely mentally challenged individuals. Well, guess what? Driving is another part of that. Ideally we'd have cars that could more or less drive themselves. But since we don't, we might as well make it as easy as possible for everyone to drive.
I for one am sick of all these elitists who insist on a "driver's test" and "driver's ed" before someone can drive a car. Shouldn't it just be available for all of us?
The reality is hardly any software is finished as the exact same project it started as. Requirements get changed at the worst possible times, the scope redefined, the timelines shortened. And yeah, at that point getting a working product out is the most important thing. Rewriting it probably WOULD result in better code, which may or may not be justification enough for doing it.
And hey, there's also a good chance those same things happen to them on their rewrite. Oops.
That's what happened to Charles Babbage. He never built a working analytical engine because he kept starting over, thinking "with what I know now I can build an even better analytical engine!" If he had just stuck to his original design he would have gotten it built, like his previous difference engine, which was built and working.
"Honey, could you come figure out why my wireless isn't connecting?"
"Sure, let me just try re-entering the WPA key and OH MY GOD WHY CAN I NOT TYPE QUERTY ANYMORE?!"
In my experience it's not a problem. For 2 years I had my keyboard switched to Dvorak (it's not too hard to pop the keys off and move them around on many modern laptops, and every major OS lets you change the layout) and used Dvorak exclusively at home, while using QWERTY every time I went to a lab (which I needed to do every time I had to print something) or a friend's house. It took me maybe 6 weeks to get used to switching back and forth. After that, I could seamlessly switch between the two, without even thinking about it.
If you test an English teacher on his English knowledge he may test poorly but he just might be intensely skilled in the narrow knowledge needed to teach his eight grade English class and he might be the type of teacher that gets through to the students.
I always wondered if there's a good way to evaluate the trade-off between deep subject knowledge and teaching skill. I know 1st-semester calculus well enough to teach it, and I believe I could teach it to anybody, and yet I will probably never study higher math (of the kind that math majors need to know to get their BS) and thus will never get the opportunity to teach it to a class. I've had several math professors (all with PhDs) who are marginally competent at getting students' interest and getting students to understand, but I will never have the credentials to take over that job even though I could do it better. (note that I'm not saying dilettantes with teaching skills should replace professors, just that more lower-level courses should be taught by them...in upper-level college coursework the premium from having a true expert, who is actively engaged in relevant research, teaching the class goes up exponentially)
On the other hand, I've also had instructors in all fields who could perfectly well handle teaching as long as they stuck exactly to the curriculum, but who if asked a complicated why-question would blubber about and get it totally wrong. Their knowledge of what they were doing was cursory, not deep, and this did pedagogical harm to their students, all of whom finished the class believing false things because the teacher just didn't know their field.
In many "at risk" districts teachers spend more than half their day making sure the kids aren't hungry, are behaving in class, have their homework completed, and have the supplies that they need like pencils.
I can't speak to a wider trend, but I can verify this in the case of at least one public school. My wife teaches 9th graders and regularly brings food for her students just to make sure they have eaten, because there isn't any at home. She also gives them books that she's finished reading, because otherwise they wouldn't have any at home. Turns out when somebody actually takes the time to figure out what they're interested in, and then provides those books, these kids really like to read.
I've been living in a flat at a park near a train station (Bielefeld, Germany, if anyone cares) for over a year...
One day the town officials decided that it would be a *great* idea to shun away the bums with classic music, so they played Beethoven's Für Elise in an infinite loop....
Well of COURSE that won't work there, Beethoven was German! They should have used some Bizet or Gounod.
You may have such a stance because you do not know what horror is the young generation in the United Kingdom.
...
Kids there do not care about anything, and as they know they have immunity, they will get into gangs just to do all sorts of vandalism.
...
You see, the problem with this is that if any of these friends tried to defend themselves, according to English law, they would be attacking/harassing minors.
So how about we change the law as a deterrant, instead of blaring classical music as a deterrant?
So yeah, in effect kids in the UK are pretty evil.
That's not what you're describing at all. It's a broken system, not broken people. YOU try learning to respect others in a country that systematically encourages you not to.
The government should make parents directly accountable for their kids actions: If your kid killed another kid then it is YOU who pays for the crime. If a kid robbed, then it is YOU who pay for the crime, as an adult. That way parents can continue to have the "freedom" of raising their kids as they want, but if the kids mess up, they will get the consequences.
That's kind of a dumb idea. How about the kids suffer the consequences for their own actions, instead of the current system where (if your description is correct) there are no consequences? Seems like a fix to me.
I really don't know about the UK, but is there really such a big problem with "unruly youths" that you have to bombard them with "deterrents" that seem to come from the privy closet of Marquis de Sade?
I don't think Mozart was ever in the privy closet of the Marquis de Sade. He was too busy with the barmaids and other wenches.
Slashdot Mirror
I was in a hot tube with a Chinese national...
You mean one of these? I'm surprised you both fit!
Hey, maybe when the Chinese internet turns into the Chinese LAN, they can have huge Chinese LAN parties! Of course, these LAN parties will have to be harmonized by the government and consist of 72 hours of back to back dota, counter-strike, and wow. Coincidentally, the Chinese government is also interested in recruiting new operators for their virtual soldiers.
The Chinese cannot have LAN parties because there's only one party allowed, the communist party.
False. Other parties are allowed, they just can't take opposition political stances or compete with the CCP in elections. If your LAN party was gonna do those things, then that's one boring-ass LAN party.
What was up with Poland, seriously? We always learned in high school that they did it to get to France.
Then your high school teachers were serious dipshits. Germany had a historic claim to parts of Poland based on them having been German (mostly Prussian) territory. Russia had a similar claim based on having long ago conquered the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, which became free after the Russian revolution.
So that makes no sense for many, many reasons.
North Koreans like their government too.
Do you have evidence for this, or are we just supposed to accept your authority?
No more slashdotting articles with more than three sentence fragments masquerading as full sentences, or from "writers" who don't know the basic mechanics of the language.
This was of course just an example but it's true for a lot of stuff, back then you had to spend a lot more time optimizing your code as well, these days premature optimization is generally considered a bad thing (since in most cases it ends up being a waste of $500 worth of programmer time to squeeze out a performance gain that $50 in hardware would've have gotten you.
If you're planning to sell a million units containing both hardware and software, then "wasting" $500 of programmer time to save even $0.01 in hardware per unit is a really sweet deal.
You can tell GP is also of the "math isn't important" camp.
Professor Gray thinks children are not mentally wired for the kind of formal math instruction that is taught in schools, and that we'd be better served by putting off the teaching of theory until the seventh grade.
Or maybe children are told that math is hard and they're bad at it, and we'd be better served by putting off that message until the seventh grade (by which point they're truly rebellious and it will only spur them to try harder).
You're right...we asshole Americans have the gall to point out that you meant "more polite than us asshole Americans". Subject vs. predicate, man.
I can haz breadz?
The Risen Kirk...single-handedly defeats the remainder of the Borg race Picard didn't defeat in Star Trek First Contact...
Picard didn't defeat more than a shipful in First Contact. Maybe you're thinking of the Voyager finale? Either way, time to turn in your geek card.
Everybody's favourite actor, author and starship captain is bringing some new ideas to the world of social networking.
Not mine. Nor most of the sci-fi fans I know. My father-in-law and my virgin ex-roommate are about the only exceptions.
Computers are tools, nothing more. they exist to allow humans to do tasks that we otherwise can't do, or at least can't do easily. As such they should be as easy and accessible for an average person to use. Ideally they would require no training and be usable by even extremely mentally challenged individuals. The more we can simplify them, the better. They should be adapted to work how we want, we should not have to adapt to them.
Well guess what? Programming is another part of that. Ideally, we'd have computers that could more or less program themselves.
Cars are tools, nothing more. They exist to allow humans to do tasks that we otherwise can't do, or at least can't do easily. Ideally they would require no training and be usable by even extremely mentally challenged individuals. Well, guess what? Driving is another part of that. Ideally we'd have cars that could more or less drive themselves. But since we don't, we might as well make it as easy as possible for everyone to drive.
I for one am sick of all these elitists who insist on a "driver's test" and "driver's ed" before someone can drive a car. Shouldn't it just be available for all of us?
The reality is hardly any software is finished as the exact same project it started as. Requirements get changed at the worst possible times, the scope redefined, the timelines shortened. And yeah, at that point getting a working product out is the most important thing. Rewriting it probably WOULD result in better code, which may or may not be justification enough for doing it.
And hey, there's also a good chance those same things happen to them on their rewrite. Oops.
That's what happened to Charles Babbage. He never built a working analytical engine because he kept starting over, thinking "with what I know now I can build an even better analytical engine!" If he had just stuck to his original design he would have gotten it built, like his previous difference engine, which was built and working.
See also Duke Nukem Forever.
Can we please stop saying we're declaring war on things that aren't sovereign nations?
Let's especially stop if they're ideas, conferences, or pieces of paper.
But what if I'm rolling my panzer divisions across Europe to literally shoot holes in a piece of paper? What would you call that, huh?
"Honey, could you come figure out why my wireless isn't connecting?" "Sure, let me just try re-entering the WPA key and OH MY GOD WHY CAN I NOT TYPE QUERTY ANYMORE?!"
In my experience it's not a problem. For 2 years I had my keyboard switched to Dvorak (it's not too hard to pop the keys off and move them around on many modern laptops, and every major OS lets you change the layout) and used Dvorak exclusively at home, while using QWERTY every time I went to a lab (which I needed to do every time I had to print something) or a friend's house. It took me maybe 6 weeks to get used to switching back and forth. After that, I could seamlessly switch between the two, without even thinking about it.
If you test an English teacher on his English knowledge he may test poorly but he just might be intensely skilled in the narrow knowledge needed to teach his eight grade English class and he might be the type of teacher that gets through to the students.
I always wondered if there's a good way to evaluate the trade-off between deep subject knowledge and teaching skill. I know 1st-semester calculus well enough to teach it, and I believe I could teach it to anybody, and yet I will probably never study higher math (of the kind that math majors need to know to get their BS) and thus will never get the opportunity to teach it to a class. I've had several math professors (all with PhDs) who are marginally competent at getting students' interest and getting students to understand, but I will never have the credentials to take over that job even though I could do it better. (note that I'm not saying dilettantes with teaching skills should replace professors, just that more lower-level courses should be taught by them...in upper-level college coursework the premium from having a true expert, who is actively engaged in relevant research, teaching the class goes up exponentially)
On the other hand, I've also had instructors in all fields who could perfectly well handle teaching as long as they stuck exactly to the curriculum, but who if asked a complicated why-question would blubber about and get it totally wrong. Their knowledge of what they were doing was cursory, not deep, and this did pedagogical harm to their students, all of whom finished the class believing false things because the teacher just didn't know their field.
In many "at risk" districts teachers spend more than half their day making sure the kids aren't hungry, are behaving in class, have their homework completed, and have the supplies that they need like pencils.
I can't speak to a wider trend, but I can verify this in the case of at least one public school. My wife teaches 9th graders and regularly brings food for her students just to make sure they have eaten, because there isn't any at home. She also gives them books that she's finished reading, because otherwise they wouldn't have any at home. Turns out when somebody actually takes the time to figure out what they're interested in, and then provides those books, these kids really like to read.
It's nearly impossible to fire underperforming teachers. Just look at the hubbub in Rhoad Island a few weeks ago.
Clearly yours was one of them.
Or in more US friendly units, it's 22 your mommas.
That only works on the West coast.
It moves the problem, it doesn't solve it.
If you move it far enough, it is solved.
I've been living in a flat at a park near a train station (Bielefeld, Germany, if anyone cares) for over a year ...
One day the town officials decided that it would be a *great* idea to shun away the bums with classic music, so they played Beethoven's Für Elise in an infinite loop....
Well of COURSE that won't work there, Beethoven was German! They should have used some Bizet or Gounod.
If being put in a room by myself with hours of Mozart was a punishment, my teacher's pet self would quite likely have started causing problems.
And if the Mozart effect is real, I would have caused even more problems to improve my grades.
You may have such a stance because you do not know what horror is the young generation in the United Kingdom.
...
Kids there do not care about anything, and as they know they have immunity, they will get into gangs just to do all sorts of vandalism.
...
You see, the problem with this is that if any of these friends tried to defend themselves, according to English law, they would be attacking/harassing minors.
So how about we change the law as a deterrant, instead of blaring classical music as a deterrant?
So yeah, in effect kids in the UK are pretty evil.
That's not what you're describing at all. It's a broken system, not broken people. YOU try learning to respect others in a country that systematically encourages you not to.
The government should make parents directly accountable for their kids actions: If your kid killed another kid then it is YOU who pays for the crime. If a kid robbed, then it is YOU who pay for the crime, as an adult. That way parents can continue to have the "freedom" of raising their kids as they want, but if the kids mess up, they will get the consequences.
That's kind of a dumb idea. How about the kids suffer the consequences for their own actions, instead of the current system where (if your description is correct) there are no consequences? Seems like a fix to me.
I really don't know about the UK, but is there really such a big problem with "unruly youths" that you have to bombard them with "deterrents" that seem to come from the privy closet of Marquis de Sade?
I don't think Mozart was ever in the privy closet of the Marquis de Sade. He was too busy with the barmaids and other wenches.
It was a sin because in the end it didn't ruin Beethoven for him it had the opposite effect and made violence a thing of beauty for him.
Wasn't that already the case?