If they set it up so musicians who do create can create can upload music onto their site, or give music away for free, like mp3.com does.
I think Redhat could easily make money from this because music unlike art, everyone can appreciate.
An Open source music portal site could be created after enough musicians are using the open source software. It could really grow into a real community.
We know the software is not there, if Redhat makes the software, it can work.
We need a fruityloop or reason like tool, We need a protools like tool, a cakewalk like tool, and a file sharing tool so we can create music and then upload it onto a network or even an extention of redhats site, and redhat can do something like Mp3.com to make profits.
As a Musician, if Redhat can manage to bring the right tools, such as fruityloop and reason like tools, something to edit stuff like protools, etc, and make it all open source.
This could really help linux, I know I'd love to be able to make my music in linux. I'll buy the redhat multimedia linux if its reasonable in price, meaning under 200 bucks. Redhat should also provide services geared towards the needs of musicians, maybe even create a peer to peer music sharing network to allow musicians to share their music in an open fashion.
Oh by the way, Redhat if you are reading this and Need a beta tester, please reply
It empowers too many people and gives us all control in a democracy like way.
This is why Microsoft hates linux. This is why the MPAA and RIAA hates napster, because it takes the power from their corperation and gives the power to us, the users, and the musicians.
Air, Medicine, Food, Water, Knowledge
on
Reclaiming the Commons
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This is what I consider the commons.
Knowledge is no longer a common due to intellectual propery. Water is sold, Medicine is an extention of Intellectual propery, so its sold, Food is sold, we have surplus's of food sitting in government warehouses like milk and rice, which is enough to feed the whole population of the USA and the whole population of alot of other places, but instead it goes to waste literally because our laws make it so it must be sold.
Knowledge should be free. Food should be free, not good food, but some food. Water should be free, no one should be able to own a stream, you should be able to go get water for free.
Air should always be free, if we go to mars you should not pay for air.
The guy at slashdot I argued with said even air should have a price.
I got into an arguement with this guy on slashdot, who believed that air should not be free. That no "commons" should exsist, that everyone should have a price, even life itself.
Why did this arguement start? Because I said I believed its our responsiblity, to pay taxes to build schools to allow everyone the chance to be successful.
You arent buying code you are buying development of the code.
The code you pay for cannot be released in just a year, its going to be released when they have enough subscribers, they may be a year or a month.
They need to make money, and like an ISP, or cable company, they cant give away free stuff until after they have the money to pay their programmers for making this stuff.
Geez no wonder all these linux companies go out of business, stupid idiots like you want them to give every all their code for free.
They gave away plenty of code, go compile WineX, you can get most of their code for free, the directX should not be merged with Wine because if they gave away all their code, why subcribe to WineX when you can just use Wine?
How the hell do you expect transgaming to pay for the creation of all this code? Transgaming is a company not an open source project, they are trying to survive as a company, if you care about what they are doing you'd subscribe so they can give away their code.
I think linux should model itself to look like OSX
XP is ugly as hell
Re:Who said we'd spend 0 dollars on defense?
on
Spy Fly
·
· Score: 2
Students might want to learn, but left to their own devices they won't always learn the right things. You have to set goals. Many students have zero intrest in learning math, science, history, etc. There is little use for knowing the rosters of the NBA teams, the lyrics of Metillica's songs etc
Many Students dont understand how this relates to the real world, Thats why they have no interest. Currently, math taught in school is alot of the time useless math. By making the math useful, such as making it part of a game, it could be fun. Instead of teaching someone statistics by a text book, they'd learn it better by playing a game which for example, required them to run a company, this would teach them how economics works, in a sim city like way, the competition would fuel them to learn more. Of course, you cannot make something interesting thats not.
Students should learn the basics, they should be listed based on hours spent, a student however should be able to have more control of when they learn what. I think most people do want to learn these things, but at their own pace, when they want. If you like math and yes alot of people like math, You'll want to spend most of your time focusing on math, this is a good thing because you will be learning.
There is no way you will ever get enough teachers capable of inspiring students to learn for the love of knowledge. Even when you do have this kind of teacher they can't reach everybody so the reward/punishment system has to be maintained. The more current schools get away from it, the worse the results. Everyone loves knowledge, the problem is students dont have purpose, motivation, or reason for learning what they learn. A kid says he wants to be an astronaught, no one sits down with this kid and tells him, "you need to be good at math, and science, lets look over your math and science work and see how you are doing, then lets look at what you'll need to do to become an astronaught"
Students need people to motivate them and guide them, every kid has dreams. Everyone has talents, and everyone is filled with knowledge, the problem is, schools arent built to take advantage of a persons strengths, they are built to try to make everyone fit the same mold, and this is exactly why kids arent interested. A scientific kid, does not want to bother with social studies and some of these other subjects, he wants to learn what he needs to learn to do what he wants to do with his life.
Goal based learning, can only work, when a student understands what they must do. The current problem with the education system, after a student learns the basics, which is about up until middle school, they are forced to learn all this useless junk which doesnt apply to what they want or like, in highschool. You dont NEED to know half the shit you learn in highschool, most of it you forget because it doesnt apply to your field, and even if it does, its usually not taught in a way you remember it.
The basics, which all students should know before they can go into what i'd call a special program which allows them to specialize on certain subjects they like, they need to know how to read, write, and they need to understand the basic concepts of math such as addition, subtraction, multiply and division, I believe a kid could learn the basics in grade 1-5, in middle school a kid can then spend that time trying to figure out which highschool they will go to, highschools should be more like college.
The idea that "poverity" causes crime or gangs is an insult to the majority of poor people who are honest. Crime is a learned behaviour. The Criminal attitude of getting something for nothing, of things are there to be taken instead of earned is a cause of poverity. Children learn the attitude that creates criminals from their parents, or from their peers who learned it from their parents. Poverity dosen't cause Crime, it's the other way around. Crime causes Poverity.
Because I'm currently at in we you'd call poverty, I can tell you exactly why poverty leads to gangs.
When you have nothing, absolutely nothing, and lets say you only live with your mother, in a cheap apartment, she works 2 jobs, you barely ever see her, theres no one to keep an eye on you, you dont have a father figure.
Lets say a neighborhood gangster, drug dealer, or king pin type guy, decides to be your father figure, you dont know how to be a man, and he tells you that in order to be a man, you have to be like him. Its very easy to fall into the trap of being suckered into a gang, when older grown men whom you respect, who have everything you dont have, a car, a nice house, etc tell you that by selling these drugs, and joining their gang, that you'll get women, a car, a and most importantly, you'll be protected from all the gangs which previously would bully you all through your childhood.
Yes, you'd be very likely to join a gang, when your choice is join the gang and be protected, given an easy as hell job, women, etc. When someone has nothing, and some guy offers to help them, even if the guy is a gang member, alot of people will join the gang because they have absolutely nothing to lose, or so they think.
Heres what they have to lose, they can lose their education, usually gangmembers drop out, causing them to lose their future, hey the gang kingpin wants this, of course the kid isnt old enough to understand.
They can go to jail, and lose their youth, but to a person whos living in poverty, going to jail is not really a punishment, lets see you take them off the cold streets and you put them in a warm jail with their friends that they grew up with, thats their punishment? Many gang members view jail in the same way you'd view college, you go to jail and you come out with respect.
The thing which most of these kids dont understand though, that their biggest loss, if the fact that they could and most likely will lose their life at a young age. Sometimes they know this and because they hate their life, dont care if they die young, they want to live it up, others however who might want to live a long life, are stuck once they join the gang and find they cant get out anymore, all the other gangs who would just mess with them, now want to kill them, so they cant get out of it.
So can poverty cause a person to join a gang? Hell yes, if a person has alot to lose, then they are a damn fool for joining a gang, but if a person has absolutely nothing to lose, well, joining a gang to them seems like an easy way out. However in my opinion they'd be better off joining the military.
Children learn the attitude that creates criminals from their parents, or from their peers who learned it from their parents. Poverity dosen't cause Crime, it's the other way around. Crime causes Poverity.
Have you ever been poor, and ever lived in poverty? Most of the kids who are in gangs, dont have parents who are bad or dishonest, their parents are usually not around due to working two jobs doing the honest thing, and its because their parents arent around, that the gang leader becomes their parent, their family. If you didnt ever see your mother because she worked two jobs, and your father just was never around to begin with, you'd need someone, or some kinda guide, can you blame your mother? No, she has to work 2 jobs. Can you blame society? No you cant blame society because its been like this since forever. Can you blame your father? Well maybe, but you still cant change things. Poverty is a DIRECT link to crime, because when you have nothing to lose, you are willing to do anything to get what you dont have. You'll rob a person to pay your bills, you'll steal a car if you cant afford one, and you will sell drugs if you have no food in the house. Whats better, being honest, or starving? This is the choice you have when you have nothing, you have to decide if you should steal something from someone else, or just have nothing.
There is another thing you are failing to take into account. The effects of Culture on learning. Some cultures place a higher value on learning than others. Some Oriental Cultures and Jewish Culture have traditionally placed a higher value on learning, and students from these backgrounds tend to do better than students who's cultures don't place a high value on learning. Place a Student who's culture hasn't placed a high value on learning in a system that lacks a reward/punishment mechinism and you have a formula for disaster, one where you create vast differences in the educational achivements because of cultural differences.
Culture does has an effect, and our current MTV culture, or our war based patriot culture is not really teaching kids to learn. To change culture you must change whats on tv, no you dont need to put alot of educational shows on tv, but more SCI FI startrek like movies, help promote the video game and computer game industry, bring computers to the most poverty filled communities and teach kids there about the internet, slowly you begin to change the culture over time, from an MTV Music Movie culture, to an Internet WWW Napster Slashdot culture.
It takes years, but its slowly happening right now. Also, you dont need a reward punishment mechanism to teach people the importance of learning, thats like saying as a punishment you make a kid run laps, its better to tell them WHY they need to learn.
Lets for example, take a typical kid, whos about to join a gang, lets say we grabbed him right off the streets, and introduce him to the net. Its easier to just tell the person whats going on, tell them the importance of learning, and guide them.
A teacher does not have to do this, this can be done by you and I, any one of us can just help a random person. Culture does have effects on learning, however, you can change culture, culture is not static its dynamic. You can take someone of a diffrent culture, and explain to them why its important to learn, and if you want to know what to say, just tell them that you understand that they have nothing, and that knowledge is the way out, and you explain to them how you got where you are, and if you were in their situaiton before how you can relate.
The problem with schools, teachers dont care enough to explain to a kid the importance of education. As a kid I didnt have a teacher walk up to me, and tell me how important it was, i didnt have that happen until later. You see, its up to older wiser adults to explain to youth how the world actually works, dont just tell them knowledge is power, tell them why its power, tell them how with knowledge they can write a business plan, and show them how to write one, tell them how bill gates used his knowledge to become so rich, and tell them that they'd make more money starting a legit business than they would starting an illegal one.
You cant make a person care about learning what they need to learn unless you tell them why they need to learn it, and teachers never tell you why you need to learn what they teach, its because they are teachers, they cannot really relate to normal people who work in an office and have real jobs.
How do you think countries view the USA in the middle east? We are no diffrent than the soviets when we say stuff like "We are going to convert the world to democracy, and use globalism to spread our capitalist ideals"
You see, the USA is no better.
The USA was busy having a War on communism, the USA was saying this stuff BEFORE the soviets started. IF you look back at history, the USA started to expand first, the USA started to be anti communist.
Now I understand, the USA being capitalist, its in the USA's best interest to try to convert others to its lifestyle.
But you have to understand that, both sides are responsible for the cold war, if both sides would have just kept their capitalist or communist business to themselves, we wouldnt have a cold war to see which side would dominate the world.
Its because both sides wanted to take over the world, that this happened, and the USA and Capitalism was around before communism, and the soviet union, so yes, its the USA who started it.
Actually, it wasnt a failure, it worked in a few tests, however its useless in real wars where there will be hundreds of dummy bombs launched with the real bomb
How often do you hear of something being made top secret when its a failure?
Also because its top secret, dont expect to be able to be able to use this for a good 20 years or more, while the military creates aircrafts.
Actually, anti gravity has already been found by a few diffrent guys, and its been proven in a lab, the problem is, its very difficult to control, it works in the lab but making it work on an actual aircraft is a totally diffrent story.
Boeing is investing in this technology because it worked in a lab, Im sure they have other anti gravity technology, and prototypes, but its kinda strange for them to announce what they are doing, usually for top secret skunkworks or phantomworks projects, they arent allowed to even tell you what it is.
Communism in Eastern Europe does not effect the USA.
Sure we trade with them, but this is not enough to create a cold war, Its still not directly involving the USA.
The USA states Capitalism around the world is their goal, is that reason enough for some communists to start a cold war?
Theres going to be people in the world with diffrent goals, even opposite of yours, however, war should only start, when they actually attack.
Russia did not attack the USA, or our allies, and at the time the places they did attack were not our allies. You still have not given me enough evidence that a whole cold war and all this money should have been spent, to stop a mere THREAT.
The cold was was pointless Maybe theres no denying nuke had to be made at some point, but the cold war?
Why were we competiting with Russia and China in the first place? Why not let them control their country, and we control ours. Why get involved in world affairs? As long as they dont attack us or our allies?
Re:I understand your point howwever
on
Spy Fly
·
· Score: 2
The USA did not have to get into the cold war that was absolutely pointless as was vietnam.
I understand world war 2 was a defensive situation and no ones doubting that hitler and japan was dangerous.
However, after world war 2, the situation was very diffrent, we were winning world war 2 before we used nuke, nuke was just the final nail in the coffin, and lastly, the cold war, and making thousands of nukes, thats pointless.
Re:Who said we'd spend 0 dollars on defense?
on
Spy Fly
·
· Score: 2
Tech Toys are not going to solve the problems plauging the schools. It dosen't matter how good the tools are if you don't have teachers that inspire students, and you can't buy inspiration. Teachers are leaving the schools in droves, not because of pay, not because of lack of computers but because of frustation that they aren't allowed to teach.
Its proven, that students like to learn, but the tools used to learn currently make learning very time consuming, difficult, etc. If technology could increase the amount you could learn, you could have shorter school days. I'm sure alot of students would like school then. Tech toys? Technology is no more a toy than the copying machine, the book and library, etc.
The tools need to be updated so teachers can teach big classes, not so teachers can inspire students. Statistics show that students do bad in school because teachers cant teach them efficiently, often students get left behind, or students want to go beyond the slow pace of the class.
With software, students will all be going at their own pace, the teachers job should be changed, they should play a more professor like role. The software should instruct the student, the teacher should choose the software, and prepare the lessons. The software should be interactive allowing students to see in complete animation how to do stuff, the student should be able to learn more on their own, instead of forced to follow the pace of the class, so via these touchpads students who are good at math can breeze on by, and go as far as they can handle.
No right to education? Thats why we have so many uneducated people, the same people your tax dollars will pay to lock up in jail. You cant win, you have to pay for them.
More toys won't solve the gang problems many schools have. That would involve tossing gangsters out where they can't prey on other students.
Ill give you that, theres nothing which can be done about gangs, however good security for schools with a gang problem should be used to keep students safe from the gangs, if this means students must have machine gun armed security officers escort them to and from school each day so be it. Gang members however in my opinion, are the result of poverty, crime, and ignorance, I believe if we get rid of poverty, and ignorance, there will be alot less gangs.
Money won't return control of the classroom to a teacher who has to deal with "little angels" whose parents think they can do no wrong and are ready to sue at the drop of a hat, unless it's spent on lawyers instead
Point taken, but you keep thinking of the classical style of teaching, where everything is placed on the teacher, look, its a students responsibility to learn, the tools should be there, the teacher should be the guide, I do not believe the teacher can properly instruct 30 students, I do not believe the teacher can control 30 students, students must be given responsbility, if they arent responsible they should be kicked out of school and forced to do homeschooling, doing their work through the internet.
Work on returning control of the class room to the teachers, on rewarding students who do bother learning, on penalizing students who don't learn, on getting politics out of the classroom, and after you solve those problems, then come back and talk to me about paying 5 times as much in School taxes as I'm paying now.
You can never penalize students who dont learn, because a student who doesnt learn can blame the lack of tools, lack of technology, etc. Right now, its the teachers fault for the students not learning, when you have one teacher and 30 students, of course its more likely that its the teachers fault if one of them doesnt learn a thing.
However when every student has all the tools they need, and all the new technology, well thats when the blame can be put on the student. I dont think students should be punished, they should first be given an option to speak with a conselor, maybe even get tutoring before they are "punished"
The goal is for them to learn, adding stress and punishment to the enviornment will teach them to hate school, it wont really help them learn. Punishment should be given to those who dont follow the rules, not for someone whos making progress even if its not enough.
Money won't solve the problem of political groups pushing their agenda in the public school system. Scince has been watered down so the Fundementalists won't be offended. History has been watered down so a number of groups on the right and left won't be offended. Every thing else has been watered down so some dummy won't have his esteem hurt when he gets a failing grade.
The grade system should be replaced by the portfolio system, students shouldnt be judged by points or grades, teachers should review their work , and judge them by things such as their progress, the amount of overall work completed, the quality of the work,
In the real world, no one gets graded, you are judged by your output, by the proof of your knowledge, not the random facts you've memorized briefly to pass a test. Not your test taking abilities.
One last thing, school should be made to be more specialized in nature, example, after someone learns the basics, they should be able to decide to focus on science, by letting students learn based on their interests, you dont have to worry about keeping them interested.
Even a gang member learns things, but building schools which focus on specific styles, and subjects, a student can remain interested on through the vital highschool years.
Japan is currently experimenting with new ideas http://www.indiana.edu/~japan/digest5.html
Beginning with the 2002 school year, major curricular reform will occur in an attempt to make schools more flexible and responsive to individual student needs. Nearly one-third of the elementary and junior high curricula will be eliminated with deep cuts in all major subjects. The replacement classroom activity will be a new endeavor entitled Integrated Studies that will have few guidelines and no accompanying textbooks. The goal of Integrated Studies is to provide students and teachers the freedom to study whatever interests them whether the topic is religion, the environment, or foreign affairs. Some elementary schools that were selected as pilot sites for Integrated Studies in 2001 experimented with teaching English during this time block.
I think by giving students more freedom and less structure, they will like school alot more and be inspired. The problem isnt that kids dont like to learn, the problem is kids dont like the structure, they dont like the teachers, they dont like what they are learning, alot of people hate history and math for example, because students have no control over what they are learning, they dont like school, and because in college people control what they are learning, most people like college.
Its not just technology which is needed, but a complete reform.
Slashdot Mirror
If they set it up so musicians who do create can create can upload music onto their site, or give music away for free, like mp3.com does.
I think Redhat could easily make money from this because music unlike art, everyone can appreciate.
An Open source music portal site could be created after enough musicians are using the open source software. It could really grow into a real community.
We know the software is not there, if Redhat makes the software, it can work.
We need a fruityloop or reason like tool, We need a protools like tool, a cakewalk like tool, and a file sharing tool so we can create music and then upload it onto a network or even an extention of redhats site, and redhat can do something like Mp3.com to make profits.
As a Musician, if Redhat can manage to bring the right tools, such as fruityloop and reason like tools, something to edit stuff like protools, etc, and make it all open source.
This could really help linux, I know I'd love to be able to make my music in linux. I'll buy the redhat multimedia linux if its reasonable in price, meaning under 200 bucks. Redhat should also provide services geared towards the needs of musicians, maybe even create a peer to peer music sharing network to allow musicians to share their music in an open fashion.
Oh by the way, Redhat if you are reading this and Need a beta tester, please reply
And Linux is a socialist technology as is Napster.
They both prove the socialist model does work for information based technologies such as source code,math, music, things like that
Honestly all information should be open and free, medicine patents too.
However, some things cant be free anytime soon, like real labor, construction, these keep us from being able to go completely socialist.
We should however adapt capitalism.
It empowers too many people and gives us all control in a democracy like way.
This is why Microsoft hates linux. This is why the MPAA and RIAA hates napster, because it takes the power from their corperation and gives the power to us, the users, and the musicians.
This is what I consider the commons.
Knowledge is no longer a common due to intellectual propery. Water is sold, Medicine is an extention of Intellectual propery, so its sold, Food is sold, we have surplus's of food sitting in government warehouses like milk and rice, which is enough to feed the whole population of the USA and the whole population of alot of other places, but instead it goes to waste literally because our laws make it so it must be sold.
Knowledge should be free.
Food should be free, not good food, but some food.
Water should be free, no one should be able to own a stream, you should be able to go get water for free.
Air should always be free, if we go to mars you should not pay for air.
The guy at slashdot I argued with said even air should have a price.
This is a fact Everytime i mention we should have a fair society, where everyone has food, education, etc
They call it socialism and say they want government to be smaller, and no public schools
I got into an arguement with this guy on slashdot, who believed that air should not be free. That no "commons" should exsist, that everyone should have a price, even life itself.
Why did this arguement start? Because I said I believed its our responsiblity, to pay taxes to build schools to allow everyone the chance to be successful.
They cant release code if you dont stay subscribed, and you dont stay subscribed because they dont release code.
Look, someone has to take the risk, they dont have the money to do it because if they do it they migght not exsist in a year.
So whos going to take the risk?
OS2 only failed because IBM didnt even support OS2, IBM didnt advertise, IBM didnt try to bring developers to OS2.
Winex has to try to get developers to do native ports, it has to have a market and be easy to port to
But all people with the crime gene, hate and aggression gene should be put on medication
I think the world would be better off if these emotional flaws did not exsist.
Currently game developers arent developing for linux because theres no market.
Theres no market because theres no games.
WineX brings games which brings gamers to linux, bringing the market.
The market eventually brings native ports.
You arent buying code you are buying development of the code.
The code you pay for cannot be released in just a year, its going to be released when they have enough subscribers, they may be a year or a month.
They need to make money, and like an ISP, or cable company, they cant give away free stuff until after they have the money to pay their programmers for making this stuff.
They never reached their subscription goals.
Geez no wonder all these linux companies go out of business, stupid idiots like you want them to give every all their code for free.
They gave away plenty of code, go compile WineX, you can get most of their code for free, the directX should not be merged with Wine because if they gave away all their code, why subcribe to WineX when you can just use Wine?
How the hell do you expect transgaming to pay for the creation of all this code? Transgaming is a company not an open source project, they are trying to survive as a company, if you care about what they are doing you'd subscribe so they can give away their code.
Since you havent subscribed, shut up.
I didnt know insects had ears
I think linux should model itself to look like OSX
XP is ugly as hell
Students might want to learn, but left to their own devices they won't always learn the right things. You have to set goals. Many students have zero intrest in learning math, science, history, etc. There is little use for knowing the rosters of the NBA teams, the lyrics of Metillica's songs etc
Many Students dont understand how this relates to the real world, Thats why they have no interest. Currently, math taught in school is alot of the time useless math. By making the math useful, such as making it part of a game, it could be fun. Instead of teaching someone statistics by a text book, they'd learn it better by playing a game which for example, required them to run a company, this would teach them how economics works, in a sim city like way, the competition would fuel them to learn more. Of course, you cannot make something interesting thats not.
Students should learn the basics, they should be listed based on hours spent, a student however should be able to have more control of when they learn what. I think most people do want to learn these things, but at their own pace, when they want. If you like math and yes alot of people like math, You'll want to spend most of your time focusing on math, this is a good thing because you will be learning.
There is no way you will ever get enough teachers capable of inspiring students to learn for the love of knowledge. Even when you do have this kind of teacher they can't reach everybody so the reward/punishment system has to be maintained. The more current schools get away from it, the worse the results.
Everyone loves knowledge, the problem is students dont have purpose, motivation, or reason for learning what they learn. A kid says he wants to be an astronaught, no one sits down with this kid and tells him, "you need to be good at math, and science, lets look over your math and science work and see how you are doing, then lets look at what you'll need to do to become an astronaught"
Students need people to motivate them and guide them, every kid has dreams. Everyone has talents, and everyone is filled with knowledge, the problem is, schools arent built to take advantage of a persons strengths, they are built to try to make everyone fit the same mold, and this is exactly why kids arent interested. A scientific kid, does not want to bother with social studies and some of these other subjects, he wants to learn what he needs to learn to do what he wants to do with his life.
Goal based learning, can only work, when a student understands what they must do. The current problem with the education system, after a student learns the basics, which is about up until middle school, they are forced to learn all this useless junk which doesnt apply to what they want or like, in highschool. You dont NEED to know half the shit you learn in highschool, most of it you forget because it doesnt apply to your field, and even if it does, its usually not taught in a way you remember it.
The basics, which all students should know before they can go into what i'd call a special program which allows them to specialize on certain subjects they like, they need to know how to read, write, and they need to understand the basic concepts of math such as addition, subtraction, multiply and division, I believe a kid could learn the basics in grade 1-5, in middle school a kid can then spend that time trying to figure out which highschool they will go to, highschools should be more like college.
The idea that "poverity" causes crime or gangs is an insult to the majority of poor people who are honest. Crime is a learned behaviour. The Criminal attitude of getting something for nothing, of things are there to be taken instead of earned is a cause of poverity. Children learn the attitude that creates criminals from their parents, or from their peers who learned it from their parents. Poverity dosen't cause Crime, it's the other way around. Crime causes Poverity.
Because I'm currently at in we you'd call poverty, I can tell you exactly why poverty leads to gangs.
When you have nothing, absolutely nothing, and lets say you only live with your mother, in a cheap apartment, she works 2 jobs, you barely ever see her, theres no one to keep an eye on you, you dont have a father figure.
Lets say a neighborhood gangster, drug dealer, or king pin type guy, decides to be your father figure, you dont know how to be a man, and he tells you that in order to be a man, you have to be like him. Its very easy to fall into the trap of being suckered into a gang, when older grown men whom you respect, who have everything you dont have, a car, a nice house, etc tell you that by selling these drugs, and joining their gang, that you'll get women, a car, a and most importantly, you'll be protected from all the gangs which previously would bully you all through your childhood.
Yes, you'd be very likely to join a gang, when your choice is join the gang and be protected, given an easy as hell job, women, etc. When someone has nothing, and some guy offers to help them, even if the guy is a gang member, alot of people will join the gang because they have absolutely nothing to lose, or so they think.
Heres what they have to lose, they can lose their education, usually gangmembers drop out, causing them to lose their future, hey the gang kingpin wants this, of course the kid isnt old enough to understand.
They can go to jail, and lose their youth, but to a person whos living in poverty, going to jail is not really a punishment, lets see you take them off the cold streets and you put them in a warm jail with their friends that they grew up with, thats their punishment? Many gang members view jail in the same way you'd view college, you go to jail and you come out with respect.
The thing which most of these kids dont understand though, that their biggest loss, if the fact that they could and most likely will lose their life at a young age. Sometimes they know this and because they hate their life, dont care if they die young, they want to live it up, others however who might want to live a long life, are stuck once they join the gang and find they cant get out anymore, all the other gangs who would just mess with them, now want to kill them, so they cant get out of it.
So can poverty cause a person to join a gang? Hell yes, if a person has alot to lose, then they are a damn fool for joining a gang, but if a person has absolutely nothing to lose, well, joining a gang to them seems like an easy way out. However in my opinion they'd be better off joining the military.
Children learn the attitude that creates criminals from their parents, or from their peers who learned it from their parents. Poverity dosen't cause Crime, it's the other way around. Crime causes Poverity.
Have you ever been poor, and ever lived in poverty? Most of the kids who are in gangs, dont have parents who are bad or dishonest, their parents are usually not around due to working two jobs doing the honest thing, and its because their parents arent around, that the gang leader becomes their parent, their family. If you didnt ever see your mother because she worked two jobs, and your father just was never around to begin with, you'd need someone, or some kinda guide, can you blame your mother? No, she has to work 2 jobs. Can you blame society? No you cant blame society because its been like this since forever. Can you blame your father? Well maybe, but you still cant change things. Poverty is a DIRECT link to crime, because when you have nothing to lose, you are willing to do anything to get what you dont have. You'll rob a person to pay your bills, you'll steal a car if you cant afford one, and you will sell drugs if you have no food in the house. Whats better, being honest, or starving? This is the choice you have when you have nothing, you have to decide if you should steal something from someone else, or just have nothing.
There is another thing you are failing to take into account. The effects of Culture on learning. Some cultures place a higher value on learning than others. Some Oriental Cultures and Jewish Culture have traditionally placed a higher value on learning, and students from these backgrounds tend to do better than students who's cultures don't place a high value on learning. Place a Student who's culture hasn't placed a high value on learning in a system that lacks a reward/punishment mechinism and you have a formula for disaster, one where you create vast differences in the educational achivements because of cultural differences.
Culture does has an effect, and our current MTV culture, or our war based patriot culture is not really teaching kids to learn. To change culture you must change whats on tv, no you dont need to put alot of educational shows on tv, but more SCI FI startrek like movies, help promote the video game and computer game industry, bring computers to the most poverty filled communities and teach kids there about the internet, slowly you begin to change the culture over time, from an MTV Music Movie culture, to an Internet WWW Napster Slashdot culture.
It takes years, but its slowly happening right now.
Also, you dont need a reward punishment mechanism to teach people the importance of learning, thats like saying as a punishment you make a kid run laps, its better to tell them WHY they need to learn.
Lets for example, take a typical kid, whos about to join a gang, lets say we grabbed him right off the streets, and introduce him to the net. Its easier to just tell the person whats going on, tell them the importance of learning, and guide them.
A teacher does not have to do this, this can be done by you and I, any one of us can just help a random person. Culture does have effects on learning, however, you can change culture, culture is not static its dynamic. You can take someone of a diffrent culture, and explain to them why its important to learn, and if you want to know what to say, just tell them that you understand that they have nothing, and that knowledge is the way out, and you explain to them how you got where you are, and if you were in their situaiton before how you can relate.
The problem with schools, teachers dont care enough to explain to a kid the importance of education. As a kid I didnt have a teacher walk up to me, and tell me how important it was, i didnt have that happen until later. You see, its up to older wiser adults to explain to youth how the world actually works, dont just tell them knowledge is power, tell them why its power, tell them how with knowledge they can write a business plan, and show them how to write one, tell them how bill gates used his knowledge to become so rich, and tell them that they'd make more money starting a legit business than they would starting an illegal one.
You cant make a person care about learning what they need to learn unless you tell them why they need to learn it, and teachers never tell you why you need to learn what they teach, its because they are teachers, they cannot really relate to normal people who work in an office and have real jobs.
And the USA is any better?
How do you think countries view the USA in the middle east? We are no diffrent than the soviets when we say stuff like "We are going to convert the world to democracy, and use globalism to spread our capitalist ideals"
You see, the USA is no better.
The USA was busy having a War on communism, the USA was saying this stuff BEFORE the soviets started. IF you look back at history, the USA started to expand first, the USA started to be anti communist.
Now I understand, the USA being capitalist, its in the USA's best interest to try to convert others to its lifestyle.
But you have to understand that, both sides are responsible for the cold war, if both sides would have just kept their capitalist or communist business to themselves, we wouldnt have a cold war to see which side would dominate the world.
Its because both sides wanted to take over the world, that this happened, and the USA and Capitalism was around before communism, and the soviet union, so yes, its the USA who started it.
Actually, it wasnt a failure, it worked in a few tests, however its useless in real wars where there will be hundreds of dummy bombs launched with the real bomb
if i had the proof id be killed the prototypes are top secret
How often do you hear of something being made top secret when its a failure?
Also because its top secret, dont expect to be able to be able to use this for a good 20 years or more, while the military creates aircrafts.
Actually, anti gravity has already been found by a few diffrent guys, and its been proven in a lab, the problem is, its very difficult to control, it works in the lab but making it work on an actual aircraft is a totally diffrent story.
Boeing is investing in this technology because it worked in a lab, Im sure they have other anti gravity technology, and prototypes, but its kinda strange for them to announce what they are doing, usually for top secret skunkworks or phantomworks projects, they arent allowed to even tell you what it is.
Communism in Eastern Europe does not effect the USA.
Sure we trade with them, but this is not enough to create a cold war, Its still not directly involving the USA.
The USA states Capitalism around the world is their goal, is that reason enough for some communists to start a cold war?
Theres going to be people in the world with diffrent goals, even opposite of yours, however, war should only start, when they actually attack.
Russia did not attack the USA, or our allies, and at the time the places they did attack were not our allies. You still have not given me enough evidence that a whole cold war and all this money should have been spent, to stop a mere THREAT.
The cold was was pointless
Maybe theres no denying nuke had to be made at some point, but the cold war?
Why were we competiting with Russia and China in the first place? Why not let them control their country, and we control ours. Why get involved in world affairs? As long as they dont attack us or our allies?
The USA did not have to get into the cold war that was absolutely pointless as was vietnam.
I understand world war 2 was a defensive situation and no ones doubting that hitler and japan was dangerous.
However, after world war 2, the situation was very diffrent, we were winning world war 2 before we used nuke, nuke was just the final nail in the coffin, and lastly, the cold war, and making thousands of nukes, thats pointless.
Tech Toys are not going to solve the problems plauging the schools. It dosen't matter how good the tools are if you don't have teachers that inspire students, and you can't buy inspiration. Teachers are leaving the schools in droves, not because of pay, not because of lack of computers but because of frustation that they aren't allowed to teach.
Its proven, that students like to learn, but the tools used to learn currently make learning very time consuming, difficult, etc. If technology could increase the amount you could learn, you could have shorter school days. I'm sure alot of students would like school then. Tech toys? Technology is no more a toy than the copying machine, the book and library, etc.
The tools need to be updated so teachers can teach big classes, not so teachers can inspire students. Statistics show that students do bad in school because teachers cant teach them efficiently, often students get left behind, or students want to go beyond the slow pace of the class.
With software, students will all be going at their own pace, the teachers job should be changed, they should play a more professor like role. The software should instruct the student, the teacher should choose the software, and prepare the lessons. The software should be interactive allowing students to see in complete animation how to do stuff, the student should be able to learn more on their own, instead of forced to follow the pace of the class, so via these touchpads students who are good at math can breeze on by, and go as far as they can handle.
No right to education? Thats why we have so many uneducated people, the same people your tax dollars will pay to lock up in jail. You cant win, you have to pay for them.
More toys won't solve the gang problems many schools have. That would involve tossing gangsters out where they can't prey on other students.
Ill give you that, theres nothing which can be done about gangs, however good security for schools with a gang problem should be used to keep students safe from the gangs, if this means students must have machine gun armed security officers escort them to and from school each day so be it. Gang members however in my opinion, are the result of poverty, crime, and ignorance, I believe if we get rid of poverty, and ignorance, there will be alot less gangs.
Money won't return control of the classroom to a teacher who has to deal with "little angels" whose parents think they can do no wrong and are ready to sue at the drop of a hat, unless it's spent on lawyers instead
Point taken, but you keep thinking of the classical style of teaching, where everything is placed on the teacher, look, its a students responsibility to learn, the tools should be there, the teacher should be the guide, I do not believe the teacher can properly instruct 30 students, I do not believe the teacher can control 30 students, students must be given responsbility, if they arent responsible they should be kicked out of school and forced to do homeschooling, doing their work through the internet.
Work on returning control of the class room to the teachers, on rewarding students who do bother learning, on penalizing students who don't learn, on getting politics out of the classroom, and after you solve those problems, then come back and talk to me about paying 5 times as much in School taxes as I'm paying now.
You can never penalize students who dont learn, because a student who doesnt learn can blame the lack of tools, lack of technology, etc. Right now, its the teachers fault for the students not learning, when you have one teacher and 30 students, of course its more likely that its the teachers fault if one of them doesnt learn a thing.
However when every student has all the tools they need, and all the new technology, well thats when the blame can be put on the student. I dont think students should be punished, they should first be given an option to speak with a conselor, maybe even get tutoring before they are "punished"
The goal is for them to learn, adding stress and punishment to the enviornment will teach them to hate school, it wont really help them learn. Punishment should be given to those who dont follow the rules, not for someone whos making progress even if its not enough.
Money won't solve the problem of political groups pushing their agenda in the public school system. Scince has been watered down so the Fundementalists won't be offended. History has been watered down so a number of groups on the right and left won't be offended. Every thing else has been watered down so some dummy won't have his esteem hurt when he gets a failing grade.
The grade system should be replaced by the portfolio system, students shouldnt be judged by points or grades, teachers should review their work , and judge them by things such as their progress, the amount of overall work completed, the quality of the work,
In the real world, no one gets graded, you are judged by your output, by the proof of your knowledge, not the random facts you've memorized briefly to pass a test. Not your test taking abilities.
One last thing, school should be made to be more specialized in nature, example, after someone learns the basics, they should be able to decide to focus on science, by letting students learn based on their interests, you dont have to worry about keeping them interested.
Even a gang member learns things, but building schools which focus on specific styles, and subjects, a student can remain interested on through the vital highschool years.
Japan is currently experimenting with new ideas
http://www.indiana.edu/~japan/digest5.html
Beginning with the 2002 school year, major curricular reform will occur in an attempt to make schools more flexible and responsive to individual student needs. Nearly one-third of the elementary and junior high curricula will be eliminated with deep cuts in all major subjects. The replacement classroom activity will be a new endeavor entitled Integrated Studies that will have few guidelines and no accompanying textbooks. The goal of Integrated Studies is to provide students and teachers the freedom to study whatever interests them whether the topic is religion, the environment, or foreign affairs. Some elementary schools that were selected as pilot sites for Integrated Studies in 2001 experimented with teaching English during this time block.
I think by giving students more freedom and less structure, they will like school alot more and be inspired. The problem isnt that kids dont like to learn, the problem is kids dont like the structure, they dont like the teachers, they dont like what they are learning, alot of people hate history and math for example, because students have no control over what they are learning, they dont like school, and because in college people control what they are learning, most people like college.
Its not just technology which is needed, but a complete reform.