Which would mean we would have to target the person who provided the leaks, the "whistle-blower" you might say. A shame there isn't some sort of law about these types of people.... (yes, I know, that law only applies when used to the government's advantage.)
On the contrary, I feel it is News for Nerds. It directly addresses the way technology is facilitating the globalization of information and how it conflicts with regional/local laws. The message was delivered by Facebook, so nerds should appreciate the irony that Palin is advocating censorship of information on a site that believes in opening up private information for all to view. Finally, the fact that a mainstream political figure (one does not have to hold office to be a current politician) is advocating the use of potentially illegal internet warfare (From the article: She [Palin] said “cyber tools" should be used to "permanently dismantle WikiLeaks") should also be of interest to nerds.
I don't think the topic is flamebait, I think it is controversial. The internet is a force of globalization, especially in the realm of information distribution. When that distribution starts to threaten state secrets, how far do we (the US) go? How about the UK, Germany, or France? How about China or India? How about Iran, Syria, or Saudi Arabia? If it is legitimate for the US to do a DDoS against Wikileaks, what about Venezuela attacking US news websites that it feels are threatening its State secrets?
Yes, I already dislike Palin, but as a nerd who tries to pay attention to the news, I want to know who is siding with Palin on this issue... and to some extent, it appears that is the current administration (who once advocated an open government).
It is true we are becoming more politically polarized as a nation, with less willingness to find a common ground or consensus on difficult issues. Negotiation between Democrats and Republicans is mostly dead, both between the representatives in office and the individual citizens who voted them in.
However, there are two major reasons I see Republicans opposed to Net Neutrality. First, it is increasing government regulatory power - and the Republicans often campaign on a platform of deregulation. Second, Republicans often are seen as pro-corporate/free market. They would argue that if the market doesn't support the pay-for-tiered access model then those businesses that adopt it will be unprofitable and thus be removed from the market. Undoubtedly, Net Neutrality is most likely perceived as a form of Socialism in their eyes - that is, the State forcing a redistribution of wealth by making corporations treat all users of data equally.
Net Neutrality is something I am mostly in support of, but not entirely. After all, if a telcomm wants to prioritize credit card/ecommerce/banking transactions, would there not be a benefit in speed of transaction processing? What if they want to prioritize medical data? What if they want to increase the cost to these users for the priority since they will need money to develop the technology (and harm their income by removing priority from their other customers)? I recently saw the article that 20% of prime-time data usage is Netflix. What if the telcomm realizes that Netflix is driving their services and wants to offer them a discount on internet volume - allowing Netflix to lower their monthly costs for streaming and attracting more customers to the broadband services needed to access Netflix? Thus I am not 100% convinced yet.
I can see it now. Come into work and no desk. Why? Monitor repair, system upgrade, scratched screen, adding pen capabilities, or whatever.
Also, is it just me, or does the prototype look like a control panel from an old nuclear reactor or other industrial facility? Oh well, guess it is just a prototype.
Why type when you'll probably be able to swype! Sorry, not trying to plug a specific tech - just wanted to point out that there are alternative techs to the traditional finger press keyboard. Another option would be to add an inking area to allow for pen input (handwriting may be slower, but most of us know how to do that at a moderate speed).
Sorry, I did not realize we were letting banks define the term NGO. Of course, what other types of groups could I see claim that their purpose is to "relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, OR undertake community development"? Being from the US, the first one that pops into my head is Christianity. Then again, I can even generalize - many major religions claim these as tenets. Therefore, Christians are Hippies... something the Conservative Christian movement would love to be characterized.
By the World Bank's definition, sure its "hippie bullshit". Should I equate that as trying to relieve suffering is bullshit, trying to promote the interest of the poor is bullshit, that protecting the environment is bullshit, that providing basic social services is bullshit, or that undertaking community development is bullshit?
Also, I'm sorry you don't think I understand what an NGO is because of your personal definition. I used the common definition vs the banker's practical definition, the one you could find in a dictionary or at dictionary.com: "noun an organization that is not part of the local or state or federal government". I could argue you don't even know how to decompose the english language and see there is a "non-" prefix attached to the adjective "governmental" which modifies the noun "organization".
Of course, I'll make your argument and state this is a bit of sophistry (a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning. - dictionary.com again) because there is a difference between the literal definition and the schema we have built for what an NGO is. We often use NGO to mean more than something like the KKK or a linux user's group (organization: a group of persons organized for some end or work; association - dictionary.com again). We have a schema that says they are usually some form of non-profit working to better society.
Where I think the real failure is the understanding of what a hippie is. Hippie: noun "a person, esp. of the late 1960s, who rejected established institutions and values and sought spontaneity, direct personal relations expressing love, and expanded consciousness, often expressed externally in the wearing of casual, folksy clothing and of beads, headbands, used garments, etc.", and I hardly think most NGOs could fall into this category. I mean, do you think the NGO African Gender Institute is trying to promote Gender Equality or the NGO Action Against Hunger is trying to promote development by rejecting the establishment, engaging in direct personal relations expressing love, and wearing beads & used clothing???
As I said originally, I know the original post was to inspire a flame-war of some sort. So, in the words of Johnny Storm... "Flame on!"
Valid point. Are you talking about building a complete in-house cloud solution from the ground up, or are you talking about implementing a 3rd party proprietary API that may contain some "black boxes"?
I've never been one for buzz words or paradigms, as you can obviously tell. I know going to the cloud is all the rage - just look at the stupid "to the CLOUD!" commercial for photo editing because your family is too self-absorbed in their own thing to hold still for even a couple of seconds. (...and yes, the end result did look like a really bad cut-and-paste Photoshop job.)
I do understand the definition of nongovernmental organization, as I understand what a government is, an organization is, and what the prefix non means.
Using Dictionary.com, the definition of NGO is "an organization that is not part of the local or state or federal government". Now, the World Bank may use a more specific definition of the term in order to determine where it puts money, but that doesn't change the definition of the word.
So, no, an NGO isn't hippie bullshit by definition. However, I get it that it is your working definition and the working definition of some others.
It is not laziness or incompetence that permits someone to consult a panel of self-professed "experts" on ideas - this is a form of brainstorming... looking for corner cases and situations that may not have occurred. In fact, I find the notion that people with to hoard their knowledge like gold rather than share it. If you have an idea, share it... if you don't because you have no time to do the work, why did you take the time out to post here in the first place? Get to work!
All the specific solutions are provided under a great deal of key assumptions.
These assumptions are made because there is insufficient information to suggest a solution. It would be like asking a student to solve the following: I have x, 13, 7, y, and 4. There is some addition and some multiplication, and they equal 20. What is the best way to solve this problem for x and y?
There are a couple things I can say. When I was going to build a practice domain at home with windows server (to centralize authentication and creating roaming profiles like at our university), I asked my boss the best way to incorporate laptops into such a model. His reaction was "Why?" A domain with central authentication for small groups (to him under 30-50, depending on the needs of the organization) creates more management work to be worth it. He took down his domain at his house and went to a media server since it was easier to manage - and laptops are just way too problematic to deal with in his view.
That is just one view. As yourself these questions: how will I install base images to the computers? If a new employee replaces an old one, will the system be re-imaged or will they use the existing set-up with all the legacy files? What software do I need? How will software be distributed (for example, locally installed or pushed out with SCCM or using virtualization like whatever SVS is called now or Microsoft Application Virtualization)? Will employees be assigned a specific computer or will they need to be able to use any workstation like it was their own system (the latter is our university's computer lab setup... and a lot goes into setting it up/maintaining it)? How sensitive is the data? What type of data needs to be stored? What level of scalability is predicted to be needed (or, will this NGO of 20 have a chance of becoming an NGO of 100 or an NGO of ten locations with 20 under central IT management)? What skill level/competencies will the NGO employees have? (Many times there are volunteers, which means you are dealing with the typical and often retired home-user *shudder* - like my mother, who managed to crash her PC regularly and even crashed the Mac I replaced that with!)
So, post a new thread with some details if you really want a serious answer to your problem. The questions I put above with the other various responses to your posts should give you a good start to all the questions you have to ask. Once you have a well defined problem to give us (not in the mathematical sense, but in the sense that people can conjecture about a solution due to specifics being provided), then I think you will see many more potential suggested solutions. Also, don't forget to respond to posters when they offer responses.:)
Yeah, NGO = NON Governmental Organization = tree hugging PC hippies who have no clue. They'd only hire people based on their ability to fit some diversity requirement because no honest government would ever hire them... governments hire only the most competent and skilled people, which is why all US citizens are so happy with every government agent they ever encountered and why they support the government taking over all sectors where private businesses operate.
Yeah, I took your trolling and jumped full force into the flames. My point is this: with so little information on the original poster you shouldn't assume anything about their qualifications. After all, you wouldn't want me to profile you as a racist due to a single post that seems to indicate you believe that certain people can only be hired for their "stylish" qualities and those "stylish" attributes mean they are not qualified or skilled to perform a job.
Should a company really put proprietary or sensitive information in the "cloud"? Is trusting your data to a remote location with a 3rd party, and thus constantly transmitting and retransmitting the data, really the best solution rather than maintaining your own infrastructure?
For a company that has no such data, the "cloud" may be a viable solution. However, when I routed my university email to gmail for my smartphone (since it did push, rather than pull every 15 minutes), I remember my bosses musing. He said he wondered how the university would feel if all their sensitive research (research = $$$ through grants and IP rights, and thus means new data is as vital as those bits representing your bank account balance) was placed on a service that scanned them for ad words - especially those departments involved with research with Microsoft or other rival companies. Although I do no research at my university, his point came across loud and clear. Its all about how much do you and should you trust the 3rd party "cloud" services.
Timing, as others have said. People loved their iPods, then fell in love with their iPhones and iTouches - they got use to the interface. True, the iPad is more in the smartphone device category than in the netbook/laptop/tablet PC market (it doesn't even have a wacom digitizer to permit inking... what good is a notepad you can't write on naturally?) - and people have grown accustom to those with the recent emergence of powerful smartphones. If the iPad was launched 2 years ago it wouldn't have succeeded.
Is that how you were taught in school? Perhaps I was too, but it definitely not the decomposition I had repeatedly drilled into my head.
I guess the point I was trying to make is how we are taught to problem solve is essential to our ability to solve problems. You have an obviously better method for solving these types of equations. Unfortunately, many of us do not - it is not in our current tool set because of the way many of us were trained.
Also, my apologies for repeating the decomposition. I was replying as I went rather than reading the list of 50 or so replies. Why? Goes back to the working memory - mine is on the low end of the 5 to 7 and I didn't have a good way to chunk all the posts. Thus I replied as I came across them.
Is is a model, a simplification for understanding. Since the human mind is capable of abstractions and pattern recognition, we can see ways in which the brain is like a computer. Because a computer is a common schema in our modern society, it gives people a very rudimentary understanding of the brain. Without it, we are facing an incredibly complicated system to analyze - something well beyond the ability of almost anyone. After all, we learn simplified models for atoms, the solar system, economics, and just about anything learned... why not the brain?
Good point. The "brain as a computer" is just a model, and over-simplification.
Also, there is an over-emphasis on the brain as a "CPU". For example, when learning a sport we put a lot of memory into the various techniques. How do you hold a basketball? What motion do you need to dribble or shoot? Where do you aim, how much force do you apply? Eventually, however, the athlete's body soon "learns" the motions - it is not something that needs to be loaded into working memory, but something that becomes automatic. The body "knows" how to respond based on a quick sensory input.
If I were to go with the computer analogy, the 5-9 pointers is a good one. Another one is to think of working memory as your registers - the easily and rapidly accessible storage slots. Once those are filled, you need to start swapping those out if you need to access more data. This slows you down in the calculations, or worse it prevents the calculation because you are faced with storing the results and loading new input will overwrite those stored results.
Neurobiology is a fascinating topic. Of course a brain is not a digital. Neurons often have multiple connections (dendrites) and emit more than one type of neurochemical signal and often has more than one type of receptor. However, I can see the point that these neurochemicals are sent out in specific quanta and that a threshold needs to be exceeded to initiate a response. Thus instead of using a neuron as the basic unit but the receptor type as the unit, we can see neurology in a digital aspect. I would take it a step further that the brain would then be a series of parallel digital computers (based on receptors) that are networked to produce a series of responses, both when considering a network of neurons and within the neuron itself.
Essentially, what we are looking at is emergent behavior. On the receptor level we see digital activity. However, once we get to the neuron or brain level, the emergent behavior of the system appears analog.
I think I saw the PBS special that covered what was mentioned. There is a school in Asia (Japan? China? India? Don't remember, it has been a while since I saw the special) where the students are started at a young age using an abacus. They learn to do complex calculations quickly. Once they read a high speed, they take away the abacus and let the students use an imaginary one. Stage 3? They begin limiting the finger twitching until the abacus exists only in the visuospacial sketchpad and "muscle memory". Although more challenging for an adult learner, with enough years even an adult could learn this method. The advantage of the abacus is manipulating larger numbers than some of the "finger" tricks - but essentially these schools reduce them to just that, minor finger twitches that trigger a mental image of an abacus.
Chunking to optimize usage of working memory is pretty impressive. Think about how we teach kids to decompose the problem of 289 * 357. We essentially tell them to break it into 4 problems x = 289 * 7, y = 289 * 5 * 10, z = 289 * 3 * 100, and x + y + z. However, we then teach student to do the same with each of the 3 subproblems of 4 calculations (289 * 7 is a = 9 * 7, b = 8 * 7 * 10, c = 2 * 7 * 100 and so on). Thus we have 13 problems to solve while the typical range of items in working memory is 5-9. By creating the mental abacus, the person conducting the calculation now has it fit inside the limits of the working memory.
I could not do the problem mentally. However, when I looked at it I said 289 * 357 is about 300 * 350, or just under 105000 ( 11 overestimation is greater than the 7 underestimation of two similarly sized numbers, so I would expect to be over slightly in my estimate). For most cases where mental calculation is needed, an approximate 3% error isn't too bad.
My reaction was 'What... the administration thinks a classroom is a private place?!?' Of course, with a camera in the back of one's head, there are certain legal considerations (like not being able to use a public restroom or go into certain areas... and don't stand with your back towards a Swedish military base, as it is illegal to photograph those... and don't use the MTA, as personal photos are allowed until you actually try it, then they will come and kick you out for life... but I'm rambling). However, I really think we are in trouble once we start calling streets, classrooms, stores, and so forth private areas. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy. (Try the acid test, would most people be comfortable having sex there? No? Then it most likely isn't private.)
Pretty much any modern convertible tablet PC running Windows 7 will have excellent out-of-the-box inking to text conversion. Add a few hours of training along with a combo digitizer/multitouch screen and the interface should be fairly smooth.
Obviously you may also need to look for other add-ons, like Dragon Naturally Speaking software to do voice-to-text and look into some of the accessibility features available. I also like using a Logitech Trackman mouse (where the roller ball is under your thumb rather and your hand just rests on it).
Really, when it comes to recommending a convertible tablet PC at this point it will depend on the work you are doing. If you are looking for an add-on for a computer, the only device that is a pen-based tablet that also displays is the Wacom Cintiq drawing tablets (either $1000 or $2000 if you want 12" or 21" displays - and the extra buttons make them bulkier than you'd expect).
I know its not really helpful, but its the best I can do with the information you provided.
Another important area of his lessons are they a brief and to the point. In other words, he does not require the student to sit through a full hour of lecture but take several 5-10 minute lectures in a series. Thus a person who has the basics can skip the intro lessons, or they can easily repeat a section over and over until they go "eureka".
I think it is far more dependent on the learning style of the student.
As to the reputation of online universities, I think it has more to do with them being for-profit schools (see Schools, Inc episode of Frontline) and the traditional not-for-profits and state-funded universities failing to embrace learning tools.
Here is my current view of traditional education K-16: read some stuff yourself (and if you are at the 13-16, this means if you don't guess on what to read you show up to class behind), get lectured on it for about 50 minutes, go home and apply it, turn in your applied learning, some teacher will grade some or all of it, then if you are lucky you will get a recap of the most commonly missed problems. Occasionally instead of lecture you will get to watch a TV program.
Here is my problem: if you put your lectures online I can listen to them just as easily as sitting in a tiny wooden chair or desk. Furthermore, if I don't get something, I can watch it again - and if I miss something said, I can "rewind". When I start doing applied work, then I often turn to the internet when I get stuck for a while. Why? This is when I need a teacher. So why not make lecture time the thing you do at home and the applied work what you do in class (when an "expert teacher" is actually available for asking clarifications? Why not make lecture a big discussion section? I think we currently have education backwards.
One of the better classes I was in had 0-60 minutes of lecture, 60-90 minutes of peer-led discussion, and 30-90 minutes of activity/planning time. Out of class time was spend doing readings or working on projects or reading. In other words, little actual class time was wasted with passive learning. I get nothing out of a traditional class that I couldn't get with a good online course.
As to online universities, check out School, Inc on Frontline. The issue may be more to do with for-profit schools embracing the online model to maximize enrollment and thus income. Most traditional universities refuse to embrace eLearning, or at most will have videos of their lectures online (such as at Berkeley) rather than fully interactive web courses. It has been stated that lecturing is not teaching, and I will say videos and forums are not e-Learning (which involves a series of interactive tools).
Well, manipulate numbers and symbols with more advanced graphing calculators (which is helpful for calculus). Add a simple program to it and it can solve most calculus problems (and geometry and trigonometry) while spitting out a step-by-step answer. That's pretty close to thinking for you when it asks you to input the problem and spit out the answer.
I remember is going through 1/2 a semester and wasting hours doing Riemann sums, then the entire class groaned as we learned the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. I have to question a system that assumes all students need to learn the proof behind the mathematics and not just the applied mathematics - there were people who wanted to be finance majors who didn't need to every prove a math problem to the detail taught.
Also, while I could do the work right without the calculator just fine our TAs corrected only 3 of 20-25 problems. I'd like to make sure I didn't make a mistake on all those uncorrected problems assigned. Since most text books are ultra-secretive about their even numbered problems, the only way to check is with a calculator with symbolic manipulation or use a program.
Almost every classroom since I was a child is pretty much been a lecture. Sure, sometimes it included a few questions answered here and there or perhaps the returning of a graded assignment, but very little teaching was going on.
If students are not active participants in the learning process, there is little to be gained. Exams and papers are merely outside confirmation that the student learned. When one tutors one is guiding a willing person who is striving to self-teach themselves (as tutors are definitely trained to not provide answers).
Don't get me wrong - I agree that delivering a lecture does not make a great teacher. I'm at UW-Madison right now so I have tons of anecdotal evidence for that. However, if you are in India and can get access to a few hours a week of internet computer time, wouldn't you love to have access to a free lecture series? Heck, NPTEL does just as good of a job as my university and it is free. (Sometimes in clearer English and in a better lecture format than my current professors do at about $1000-$1800 per course!) Why? The only thing they don't provide for free is independent examination and confirmation that I learned - its up to me to prove to myself I know the skills.
True enough. If you want to analyze total energy inputs per square foot, nothing beats a good old fashioned high rise building in a dense urban area, especially when you consider you can create mixed residential and commercial zones ("walkable neighborhoods"). Additionally, there are also a whole slew of alternatives for retrofitting existing homes to "green" them (see http://www.cows.org/collab_projects_detail.asp?id=54 for alternatives).
Why do I consider this an extreme green solution? Each dome is just under 500 square feet, the insulating material is also the wall material, it is moving housing toward the realm of economically affordable for more people, it is designed to be resistant to damaging events like hurricanes and earthquakes (reducing material burdens on the globe with rebuilding expenses), and the lightweight panels (88 kg each) reduce the energy burden for transportation.
Myself, I dislike the current state of how they build most apartment complexes. (For example, poor design leads to sound transmission from one unit to the other.) I also have a bit of disdain for urban life due to sensitivities to automotive exhausts (in urban environments the fumes literally cause a burning sensation throughout my eyes and sinuses, which leads to migraine headaches and other health issues).
Of course, lifestyle also is important. A person living in a rural environment that is capable of telecommuting, uses off-grid power, produces on a small scale a diversified crop to supplement occasional trips to urban markets, and builds a small house that is minimally disruptive to the environment (at 88kg a panel, two people could easily haul the panels to a remote location rather than require a cut path for a truck to deliver it) will make much less of an impact than a person who constantly uses over-packaged consumer goods in large urban condo.
Basically, its why I try not to judge SUV owners. If a person has 6 kids they are constantly hauling around along with their gear, doing multiple trips in a Prius is a worse choice than the SUV.
Also, I question whether urbanization of the entire globe is both feasible and/or practical.
You can purchase the dome homes I mentioned... if you live in Japan. There have been quite a few built there. However, thanks for the link. I'll check it out, but I recall one blog post saying the dome houses are around $30k (with the calearth ones obviously being cheaper, but I question their use in a northern climate - I'll be looking into that option also) and the L-Vs are listed at $120 to $195 per square foot. However, the L-Vs do list a 2nd story option, so that might be nice for more traditional homes in the US. (Obviously a dome home is not going to get past most home owners associations, but the L-Vs might).
Slashdot Mirror
Which would mean we would have to target the person who provided the leaks, the "whistle-blower" you might say. A shame there isn't some sort of law about these types of people.... (yes, I know, that law only applies when used to the government's advantage.)
On the contrary, I feel it is News for Nerds. It directly addresses the way technology is facilitating the globalization of information and how it conflicts with regional/local laws. The message was delivered by Facebook, so nerds should appreciate the irony that Palin is advocating censorship of information on a site that believes in opening up private information for all to view. Finally, the fact that a mainstream political figure (one does not have to hold office to be a current politician) is advocating the use of potentially illegal internet warfare (From the article: She [Palin] said “cyber tools" should be used to "permanently dismantle WikiLeaks") should also be of interest to nerds.
I don't think the topic is flamebait, I think it is controversial. The internet is a force of globalization, especially in the realm of information distribution. When that distribution starts to threaten state secrets, how far do we (the US) go? How about the UK, Germany, or France? How about China or India? How about Iran, Syria, or Saudi Arabia? If it is legitimate for the US to do a DDoS against Wikileaks, what about Venezuela attacking US news websites that it feels are threatening its State secrets?
Yes, I already dislike Palin, but as a nerd who tries to pay attention to the news, I want to know who is siding with Palin on this issue... and to some extent, it appears that is the current administration (who once advocated an open government).
It is true we are becoming more politically polarized as a nation, with less willingness to find a common ground or consensus on difficult issues. Negotiation between Democrats and Republicans is mostly dead, both between the representatives in office and the individual citizens who voted them in.
However, there are two major reasons I see Republicans opposed to Net Neutrality. First, it is increasing government regulatory power - and the Republicans often campaign on a platform of deregulation. Second, Republicans often are seen as pro-corporate/free market. They would argue that if the market doesn't support the pay-for-tiered access model then those businesses that adopt it will be unprofitable and thus be removed from the market. Undoubtedly, Net Neutrality is most likely perceived as a form of Socialism in their eyes - that is, the State forcing a redistribution of wealth by making corporations treat all users of data equally.
Net Neutrality is something I am mostly in support of, but not entirely. After all, if a telcomm wants to prioritize credit card/ecommerce/banking transactions, would there not be a benefit in speed of transaction processing? What if they want to prioritize medical data? What if they want to increase the cost to these users for the priority since they will need money to develop the technology (and harm their income by removing priority from their other customers)? I recently saw the article that 20% of prime-time data usage is Netflix. What if the telcomm realizes that Netflix is driving their services and wants to offer them a discount on internet volume - allowing Netflix to lower their monthly costs for streaming and attracting more customers to the broadband services needed to access Netflix? Thus I am not 100% convinced yet.
I can see it now. Come into work and no desk. Why? Monitor repair, system upgrade, scratched screen, adding pen capabilities, or whatever.
Also, is it just me, or does the prototype look like a control panel from an old nuclear reactor or other industrial facility? Oh well, guess it is just a prototype.
Why type when you'll probably be able to swype! Sorry, not trying to plug a specific tech - just wanted to point out that there are alternative techs to the traditional finger press keyboard. Another option would be to add an inking area to allow for pen input (handwriting may be slower, but most of us know how to do that at a moderate speed).
Sorry, I did not realize we were letting banks define the term NGO. Of course, what other types of groups could I see claim that their purpose is to "relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, OR undertake community development"? Being from the US, the first one that pops into my head is Christianity. Then again, I can even generalize - many major religions claim these as tenets. Therefore, Christians are Hippies... something the Conservative Christian movement would love to be characterized.
By the World Bank's definition, sure its "hippie bullshit". Should I equate that as trying to relieve suffering is bullshit, trying to promote the interest of the poor is bullshit, that protecting the environment is bullshit, that providing basic social services is bullshit, or that undertaking community development is bullshit?
Also, I'm sorry you don't think I understand what an NGO is because of your personal definition. I used the common definition vs the banker's practical definition, the one you could find in a dictionary or at dictionary.com: "noun an organization that is not part of the local or state or federal government". I could argue you don't even know how to decompose the english language and see there is a "non-" prefix attached to the adjective "governmental" which modifies the noun "organization".
Of course, I'll make your argument and state this is a bit of sophistry (a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning. - dictionary.com again) because there is a difference between the literal definition and the schema we have built for what an NGO is. We often use NGO to mean more than something like the KKK or a linux user's group (organization: a group of persons organized for some end or work; association - dictionary.com again). We have a schema that says they are usually some form of non-profit working to better society.
Where I think the real failure is the understanding of what a hippie is. Hippie: noun "a person, esp. of the late 1960s, who rejected established institutions and values and sought spontaneity, direct personal relations expressing love, and expanded consciousness, often expressed externally in the wearing of casual, folksy clothing and of beads, headbands, used garments, etc.", and I hardly think most NGOs could fall into this category. I mean, do you think the NGO African Gender Institute is trying to promote Gender Equality or the NGO Action Against Hunger is trying to promote development by rejecting the establishment, engaging in direct personal relations expressing love, and wearing beads & used clothing???
As I said originally, I know the original post was to inspire a flame-war of some sort. So, in the words of Johnny Storm... "Flame on!"
Valid point. Are you talking about building a complete in-house cloud solution from the ground up, or are you talking about implementing a 3rd party proprietary API that may contain some "black boxes"?
I've never been one for buzz words or paradigms, as you can obviously tell. I know going to the cloud is all the rage - just look at the stupid "to the CLOUD!" commercial for photo editing because your family is too self-absorbed in their own thing to hold still for even a couple of seconds. (...and yes, the end result did look like a really bad cut-and-paste Photoshop job.)
I do understand the definition of nongovernmental organization, as I understand what a government is, an organization is, and what the prefix non means.
Using Dictionary.com, the definition of NGO is "an organization that is not part of the local or state or federal government". Now, the World Bank may use a more specific definition of the term in order to determine where it puts money, but that doesn't change the definition of the word.
So, no, an NGO isn't hippie bullshit by definition. However, I get it that it is your working definition and the working definition of some others.
However, I am in this camp concerning this issue:
There are a couple things I can say. When I was going to build a practice domain at home with windows server (to centralize authentication and creating roaming profiles like at our university), I asked my boss the best way to incorporate laptops into such a model. His reaction was "Why?" A domain with central authentication for small groups (to him under 30-50, depending on the needs of the organization) creates more management work to be worth it. He took down his domain at his house and went to a media server since it was easier to manage - and laptops are just way too problematic to deal with in his view.
That is just one view. As yourself these questions: how will I install base images to the computers? If a new employee replaces an old one, will the system be re-imaged or will they use the existing set-up with all the legacy files? What software do I need? How will software be distributed (for example, locally installed or pushed out with SCCM or using virtualization like whatever SVS is called now or Microsoft Application Virtualization)? Will employees be assigned a specific computer or will they need to be able to use any workstation like it was their own system (the latter is our university's computer lab setup... and a lot goes into setting it up/maintaining it)? How sensitive is the data? What type of data needs to be stored? What level of scalability is predicted to be needed (or, will this NGO of 20 have a chance of becoming an NGO of 100 or an NGO of ten locations with 20 under central IT management)? What skill level/competencies will the NGO employees have? (Many times there are volunteers, which means you are dealing with the typical and often retired home-user *shudder* - like my mother, who managed to crash her PC regularly and even crashed the Mac I replaced that with!)
So, post a new thread with some details if you really want a serious answer to your problem. The questions I put above with the other various responses to your posts should give you a good start to all the questions you have to ask. Once you have a well defined problem to give us (not in the mathematical sense, but in the sense that people can conjecture about a solution due to specifics being provided), then I think you will see many more potential suggested solutions. Also, don't forget to respond to posters when they offer responses. :)
Yeah, NGO = NON Governmental Organization = tree hugging PC hippies who have no clue. They'd only hire people based on their ability to fit some diversity requirement because no honest government would ever hire them... governments hire only the most competent and skilled people, which is why all US citizens are so happy with every government agent they ever encountered and why they support the government taking over all sectors where private businesses operate.
Yeah, I took your trolling and jumped full force into the flames. My point is this: with so little information on the original poster you shouldn't assume anything about their qualifications. After all, you wouldn't want me to profile you as a racist due to a single post that seems to indicate you believe that certain people can only be hired for their "stylish" qualities and those "stylish" attributes mean they are not qualified or skilled to perform a job.
Should a company really put proprietary or sensitive information in the "cloud"? Is trusting your data to a remote location with a 3rd party, and thus constantly transmitting and retransmitting the data, really the best solution rather than maintaining your own infrastructure?
For a company that has no such data, the "cloud" may be a viable solution. However, when I routed my university email to gmail for my smartphone (since it did push, rather than pull every 15 minutes), I remember my bosses musing. He said he wondered how the university would feel if all their sensitive research (research = $$$ through grants and IP rights, and thus means new data is as vital as those bits representing your bank account balance) was placed on a service that scanned them for ad words - especially those departments involved with research with Microsoft or other rival companies. Although I do no research at my university, his point came across loud and clear. Its all about how much do you and should you trust the 3rd party "cloud" services.
Timing, as others have said. People loved their iPods, then fell in love with their iPhones and iTouches - they got use to the interface. True, the iPad is more in the smartphone device category than in the netbook/laptop/tablet PC market (it doesn't even have a wacom digitizer to permit inking... what good is a notepad you can't write on naturally?) - and people have grown accustom to those with the recent emergence of powerful smartphones. If the iPad was launched 2 years ago it wouldn't have succeeded.
Is that how you were taught in school? Perhaps I was too, but it definitely not the decomposition I had repeatedly drilled into my head.
I guess the point I was trying to make is how we are taught to problem solve is essential to our ability to solve problems. You have an obviously better method for solving these types of equations. Unfortunately, many of us do not - it is not in our current tool set because of the way many of us were trained.
Also, my apologies for repeating the decomposition. I was replying as I went rather than reading the list of 50 or so replies. Why? Goes back to the working memory - mine is on the low end of the 5 to 7 and I didn't have a good way to chunk all the posts. Thus I replied as I came across them.
Is is a model, a simplification for understanding. Since the human mind is capable of abstractions and pattern recognition, we can see ways in which the brain is like a computer. Because a computer is a common schema in our modern society, it gives people a very rudimentary understanding of the brain. Without it, we are facing an incredibly complicated system to analyze - something well beyond the ability of almost anyone. After all, we learn simplified models for atoms, the solar system, economics, and just about anything learned... why not the brain?
Good point. The "brain as a computer" is just a model, and over-simplification.
Also, there is an over-emphasis on the brain as a "CPU". For example, when learning a sport we put a lot of memory into the various techniques. How do you hold a basketball? What motion do you need to dribble or shoot? Where do you aim, how much force do you apply? Eventually, however, the athlete's body soon "learns" the motions - it is not something that needs to be loaded into working memory, but something that becomes automatic. The body "knows" how to respond based on a quick sensory input.
If I were to go with the computer analogy, the 5-9 pointers is a good one. Another one is to think of working memory as your registers - the easily and rapidly accessible storage slots. Once those are filled, you need to start swapping those out if you need to access more data. This slows you down in the calculations, or worse it prevents the calculation because you are faced with storing the results and loading new input will overwrite those stored results.
Neurobiology is a fascinating topic. Of course a brain is not a digital. Neurons often have multiple connections (dendrites) and emit more than one type of neurochemical signal and often has more than one type of receptor. However, I can see the point that these neurochemicals are sent out in specific quanta and that a threshold needs to be exceeded to initiate a response. Thus instead of using a neuron as the basic unit but the receptor type as the unit, we can see neurology in a digital aspect. I would take it a step further that the brain would then be a series of parallel digital computers (based on receptors) that are networked to produce a series of responses, both when considering a network of neurons and within the neuron itself.
Essentially, what we are looking at is emergent behavior. On the receptor level we see digital activity. However, once we get to the neuron or brain level, the emergent behavior of the system appears analog.
I think I saw the PBS special that covered what was mentioned. There is a school in Asia (Japan? China? India? Don't remember, it has been a while since I saw the special) where the students are started at a young age using an abacus. They learn to do complex calculations quickly. Once they read a high speed, they take away the abacus and let the students use an imaginary one. Stage 3? They begin limiting the finger twitching until the abacus exists only in the visuospacial sketchpad and "muscle memory". Although more challenging for an adult learner, with enough years even an adult could learn this method. The advantage of the abacus is manipulating larger numbers than some of the "finger" tricks - but essentially these schools reduce them to just that, minor finger twitches that trigger a mental image of an abacus.
Chunking to optimize usage of working memory is pretty impressive. Think about how we teach kids to decompose the problem of 289 * 357. We essentially tell them to break it into 4 problems x = 289 * 7, y = 289 * 5 * 10, z = 289 * 3 * 100, and x + y + z. However, we then teach student to do the same with each of the 3 subproblems of 4 calculations (289 * 7 is a = 9 * 7, b = 8 * 7 * 10, c = 2 * 7 * 100 and so on). Thus we have 13 problems to solve while the typical range of items in working memory is 5-9. By creating the mental abacus, the person conducting the calculation now has it fit inside the limits of the working memory.
I could not do the problem mentally. However, when I looked at it I said 289 * 357 is about 300 * 350, or just under 105000 ( 11 overestimation is greater than the 7 underestimation of two similarly sized numbers, so I would expect to be over slightly in my estimate). For most cases where mental calculation is needed, an approximate 3% error isn't too bad.
My reaction was 'What... the administration thinks a classroom is a private place?!?' Of course, with a camera in the back of one's head, there are certain legal considerations (like not being able to use a public restroom or go into certain areas... and don't stand with your back towards a Swedish military base, as it is illegal to photograph those... and don't use the MTA, as personal photos are allowed until you actually try it, then they will come and kick you out for life... but I'm rambling). However, I really think we are in trouble once we start calling streets, classrooms, stores, and so forth private areas. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy. (Try the acid test, would most people be comfortable having sex there? No? Then it most likely isn't private.)
Pretty much any modern convertible tablet PC running Windows 7 will have excellent out-of-the-box inking to text conversion. Add a few hours of training along with a combo digitizer/multitouch screen and the interface should be fairly smooth.
Obviously you may also need to look for other add-ons, like Dragon Naturally Speaking software to do voice-to-text and look into some of the accessibility features available. I also like using a Logitech Trackman mouse (where the roller ball is under your thumb rather and your hand just rests on it).
Really, when it comes to recommending a convertible tablet PC at this point it will depend on the work you are doing. If you are looking for an add-on for a computer, the only device that is a pen-based tablet that also displays is the Wacom Cintiq drawing tablets (either $1000 or $2000 if you want 12" or 21" displays - and the extra buttons make them bulkier than you'd expect).
I know its not really helpful, but its the best I can do with the information you provided.
Another important area of his lessons are they a brief and to the point. In other words, he does not require the student to sit through a full hour of lecture but take several 5-10 minute lectures in a series. Thus a person who has the basics can skip the intro lessons, or they can easily repeat a section over and over until they go "eureka".
I think it is far more dependent on the learning style of the student.
As to the reputation of online universities, I think it has more to do with them being for-profit schools (see Schools, Inc episode of Frontline) and the traditional not-for-profits and state-funded universities failing to embrace learning tools.
Here is my current view of traditional education K-16: read some stuff yourself (and if you are at the 13-16, this means if you don't guess on what to read you show up to class behind), get lectured on it for about 50 minutes, go home and apply it, turn in your applied learning, some teacher will grade some or all of it, then if you are lucky you will get a recap of the most commonly missed problems. Occasionally instead of lecture you will get to watch a TV program.
Here is my problem: if you put your lectures online I can listen to them just as easily as sitting in a tiny wooden chair or desk. Furthermore, if I don't get something, I can watch it again - and if I miss something said, I can "rewind". When I start doing applied work, then I often turn to the internet when I get stuck for a while. Why? This is when I need a teacher. So why not make lecture time the thing you do at home and the applied work what you do in class (when an "expert teacher" is actually available for asking clarifications? Why not make lecture a big discussion section? I think we currently have education backwards.
One of the better classes I was in had 0-60 minutes of lecture, 60-90 minutes of peer-led discussion, and 30-90 minutes of activity/planning time. Out of class time was spend doing readings or working on projects or reading. In other words, little actual class time was wasted with passive learning. I get nothing out of a traditional class that I couldn't get with a good online course.
As to online universities, check out School, Inc on Frontline. The issue may be more to do with for-profit schools embracing the online model to maximize enrollment and thus income. Most traditional universities refuse to embrace eLearning, or at most will have videos of their lectures online (such as at Berkeley) rather than fully interactive web courses. It has been stated that lecturing is not teaching, and I will say videos and forums are not e-Learning (which involves a series of interactive tools).
Well, manipulate numbers and symbols with more advanced graphing calculators (which is helpful for calculus). Add a simple program to it and it can solve most calculus problems (and geometry and trigonometry) while spitting out a step-by-step answer. That's pretty close to thinking for you when it asks you to input the problem and spit out the answer.
I remember is going through 1/2 a semester and wasting hours doing Riemann sums, then the entire class groaned as we learned the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. I have to question a system that assumes all students need to learn the proof behind the mathematics and not just the applied mathematics - there were people who wanted to be finance majors who didn't need to every prove a math problem to the detail taught.
Also, while I could do the work right without the calculator just fine our TAs corrected only 3 of 20-25 problems. I'd like to make sure I didn't make a mistake on all those uncorrected problems assigned. Since most text books are ultra-secretive about their even numbered problems, the only way to check is with a calculator with symbolic manipulation or use a program.
Almost every classroom since I was a child is pretty much been a lecture. Sure, sometimes it included a few questions answered here and there or perhaps the returning of a graded assignment, but very little teaching was going on.
If students are not active participants in the learning process, there is little to be gained. Exams and papers are merely outside confirmation that the student learned. When one tutors one is guiding a willing person who is striving to self-teach themselves (as tutors are definitely trained to not provide answers).
Don't get me wrong - I agree that delivering a lecture does not make a great teacher. I'm at UW-Madison right now so I have tons of anecdotal evidence for that. However, if you are in India and can get access to a few hours a week of internet computer time, wouldn't you love to have access to a free lecture series? Heck, NPTEL does just as good of a job as my university and it is free. (Sometimes in clearer English and in a better lecture format than my current professors do at about $1000-$1800 per course!) Why? The only thing they don't provide for free is independent examination and confirmation that I learned - its up to me to prove to myself I know the skills.
True enough. If you want to analyze total energy inputs per square foot, nothing beats a good old fashioned high rise building in a dense urban area, especially when you consider you can create mixed residential and commercial zones ("walkable neighborhoods"). Additionally, there are also a whole slew of alternatives for retrofitting existing homes to "green" them (see http://www.cows.org/collab_projects_detail.asp?id=54 for alternatives).
Why do I consider this an extreme green solution? Each dome is just under 500 square feet, the insulating material is also the wall material, it is moving housing toward the realm of economically affordable for more people, it is designed to be resistant to damaging events like hurricanes and earthquakes (reducing material burdens on the globe with rebuilding expenses), and the lightweight panels (88 kg each) reduce the energy burden for transportation.
Myself, I dislike the current state of how they build most apartment complexes. (For example, poor design leads to sound transmission from one unit to the other.) I also have a bit of disdain for urban life due to sensitivities to automotive exhausts (in urban environments the fumes literally cause a burning sensation throughout my eyes and sinuses, which leads to migraine headaches and other health issues).
Of course, lifestyle also is important. A person living in a rural environment that is capable of telecommuting, uses off-grid power, produces on a small scale a diversified crop to supplement occasional trips to urban markets, and builds a small house that is minimally disruptive to the environment (at 88kg a panel, two people could easily haul the panels to a remote location rather than require a cut path for a truck to deliver it) will make much less of an impact than a person who constantly uses over-packaged consumer goods in large urban condo.
Basically, its why I try not to judge SUV owners. If a person has 6 kids they are constantly hauling around along with their gear, doing multiple trips in a Prius is a worse choice than the SUV.
Also, I question whether urbanization of the entire globe is both feasible and/or practical.
You can purchase the dome homes I mentioned... if you live in Japan. There have been quite a few built there. However, thanks for the link. I'll check it out, but I recall one blog post saying the dome houses are around $30k (with the calearth ones obviously being cheaper, but I question their use in a northern climate - I'll be looking into that option also) and the L-Vs are listed at $120 to $195 per square foot. However, the L-Vs do list a 2nd story option, so that might be nice for more traditional homes in the US. (Obviously a dome home is not going to get past most home owners associations, but the L-Vs might).