Last year, my university proposed to instate a policy under which all students would be required to rent a laptop from the school. Now, I realize that K-12 is a completely different situation than university computing, but I think some of the same problems would apply to using laptops in a K-12 setting. First, laptops are considerably more expensive than desktops. By forcing students to own laptops or spending school district money on laptops for each student, a large amount of money would be spent on laptops which would, in my opinion, be better spent on keeping the district's software up to date. It seems to me that students would be better prepared for what they choose to do after high school if they were familiar with current software. Second, standardized laptops which would be used thoroughout an entire school or district would compromise many of the machines' possible uses. Laptops have two key hardware problems when it comes to versatility between classes within a school: hardware capabilities and longevity. A computer which is to be used for subjects which require basic word processing and internet research need not be as powerful as one used for subjects like art which require programs such as the Gimp or Photoshop. If laptops are going to be used for all subjects, all students would need to be outfitted with a laptop which could be used for memory and space intensive projects like computer design which would raise costs considerably. Even if top-of-the-line laptops were purchased, think about how often the systems would have to be updated in order to remain up to date. Laptops are not nearly as easy to upgrade as desktop systems and thus would be far more difficult to keep up to date. Finally, what happens when a student brings a laptop home and has problems with the system? If money was spent on computer labs in the schools, a system administrator could, possibly with the help of students to help further computer education, maintain the systems to ensure that problems were quickly fixed or avoided. A child who runs into problems while at home would have to wait until the next day or pay for expensive repairs to get the laptop fixed. Laptops are a great idea, but should not be required by a school or district. Individuals should be tailored to individual needs, not standardized by political bodies like a school board.
I am wondering what your thoughts are on the best approach to take when creating an AI network. There seem to be two major approaches from what I have read: a sort of information storehouse of facts and reason or a decentralized set of processes competing for limited resources. A more encyclopedic database of facts following programmed logical rules seems to provide AI which is very good at computational skills such as logic puzzles and playing chess, but doesn't seem to be able to deal with everyday tasks such as walking. Specific processes competing for limited resources within one system are much better at creating movement and allowing for other instinctual (for lack of a better word) abilities found in animals, but can such a system possibly develop into a system capable of emulating higher order thought such as planning, theorizing, and being self-aware? Both approaches seem to have their merits, but which one do you think provides the best possibility for creating an AI system which could come mimic, in some way, human mental capabilities?
Slashdot Mirror
Last year, my university proposed to instate a policy under which all students would be required to rent a laptop from the school. Now, I realize that K-12 is a completely different situation than university computing, but I think some of the same problems would apply to using laptops in a K-12 setting. First, laptops are considerably more expensive than desktops. By forcing students to own laptops or spending school district money on laptops for each student, a large amount of money would be spent on laptops which would, in my opinion, be better spent on keeping the district's software up to date. It seems to me that students would be better prepared for what they choose to do after high school if they were familiar with current software. Second, standardized laptops which would be used thoroughout an entire school or district would compromise many of the machines' possible uses. Laptops have two key hardware problems when it comes to versatility between classes within a school: hardware capabilities and longevity. A computer which is to be used for subjects which require basic word processing and internet research need not be as powerful as one used for subjects like art which require programs such as the Gimp or Photoshop. If laptops are going to be used for all subjects, all students would need to be outfitted with a laptop which could be used for memory and space intensive projects like computer design which would raise costs considerably. Even if top-of-the-line laptops were purchased, think about how often the systems would have to be updated in order to remain up to date. Laptops are not nearly as easy to upgrade as desktop systems and thus would be far more difficult to keep up to date. Finally, what happens when a student brings a laptop home and has problems with the system? If money was spent on computer labs in the schools, a system administrator could, possibly with the help of students to help further computer education, maintain the systems to ensure that problems were quickly fixed or avoided. A child who runs into problems while at home would have to wait until the next day or pay for expensive repairs to get the laptop fixed. Laptops are a great idea, but should not be required by a school or district. Individuals should be tailored to individual needs, not standardized by political bodies like a school board.
I am wondering what your thoughts are on the best approach to take when creating an AI network. There seem to be two major approaches from what I have read: a sort of information storehouse of facts and reason or a decentralized set of processes competing for limited resources. A more encyclopedic database of facts following programmed logical rules seems to provide AI which is very good at computational skills such as logic puzzles and playing chess, but doesn't seem to be able to deal with everyday tasks such as walking. Specific processes competing for limited resources within one system are much better at creating movement and allowing for other instinctual (for lack of a better word) abilities found in animals, but can such a system possibly develop into a system capable of emulating higher order thought such as planning, theorizing, and being self-aware? Both approaches seem to have their merits, but which one do you think provides the best possibility for creating an AI system which could come mimic, in some way, human mental capabilities?