If you have nothing to hide, AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW has nothing to hide, perhaps you'll be fine.
Well, what you need to hide changes as the government changes. Something perfectly okay to normal people may be considered evil by the government. 'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear' truly is nonsensical, as you said.
Maybe there's not much you can do with such simple subject matter, but I still feel the tests are still sorely lacking.
It appears designed to be relatively easy for good students.
It is often the case that "good students" are merely people who follow instructions, not necessarily people who are truly intelligent. I'll agree that the tests would be easy for people who actually understand the material, but that's not the problem; the problem is that many people can pass such tests by only memorizing facts. Of course, I don't think that memorization is always a bad thing (as some things need to be memorized), but the way we're having students in the public school system memorize material, rather than have them understand it, is seriously disappointing.
It seems to get worse and worse as the subject matter gets more complicated.
It's an non-ideal test for a non-ideal system
Of course.
Tests like these exist because there is a demand for "accountability" through quantitative and behavioral performance metrics. Their scale and desired uniformity require simple multiple choice exams, which in turn must test many small, concrete problems in using some common vocabulary.
NCLB only made this problem even worse. As I see it, our public school system has had these same problems (one-size-fits-all education, rote memorization, ridiculous testing, etc.) for a very long time.
Well, I agree with you that the problem is certainly not going to get better if we keep cutting funding like we are.
Any pussy who says they won't fly has been sucking on his momma's teets for too many years and needs to get out in the world and visit a 3rd world country to know what real suffering.
Those things called rights? Who cares about them!? The constitution? Just a worthless piece of paper, and anyone who complains is just a wimp.
Oh, and if I punch you in the face, you have no right to complain because I could've broken your arm instead!
And I do realize those are 4th grade tests, but what part of doing well on these tests proves that a student understands the materials? They're garbage, just like I said.
Hopefully you're a mere troll. If you're not, then you're a freedom-hating imbecile.
Be truly rational and entertain the notion in your mind as a hypothesis that there is now or will be shortly something about the world that makes this measure necessary to countering acts of mass terrorism
Freedom is more important than safety, and history has shown us that people with power will abuse it. You're not rational at all if you're serious.
You know that most people like to sleep well at night knowing they have a functional government that is doing everything necessary to prevent acts of War on American soil, right?
You mean by ruining other countries, molesting people at airports, spying on its own citizens, and generally ignoring the constitution? And you consider the people who want this to be "rational"? You're an imbecile, if so.
The only intelligent decision is to assume the government is abusing its powers. History has shown as that when you give someone too much power, they will abuse it. There is no reason to think otherwise.
I want small government, but I demand that we pointlessly interfere in other countries' affairs; that we spy on our own citizens without warrants or with secret warrants; that we shove people who we deem to be dangerous away in free speech zones; that we slap GPS tracking devices on people's cars; that we give certain people government-enforced monopolies that promote censorship and/or destroy real property rights; and that we grope everyone who tries to get on a plane because they might be terrorists. Yeah, I really adore small government; trust me.
It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
satisfactory and so I'm forced to conclude that they are not acting in manner consistent with appropriate respect for my civil rights.
If they were acting in a manner consistent with appropriate respect for our civil rights, the TSA wouldn't exist at all. Whether or not a 4oz liquid bomb can be made, freedom is more important than safety. The problem with your comment is that it almost seems as if you would be willing to give up your freedoms if it would truly keep you safe, and that absolutely should not be the case. Or maybe it just seemed that way, and you wouldn't actually do that, but I still feel the need to stress that point.
I'm willing to extend some amount of trust to our elected leaders
Given history, that is not a good idea. The ability to act in secrecy (whether or not they tell you why and give probable reasons) will be abused; bet on it.
You must be quite selfish to not care if they violate other people's rights. That's what I get out of your comment. Even if they're not watching me specifically, the violation of anyone's rights is a big concern.
Do we really want to use the same tests that can be passed by merely memorizing the material to determine if students are doing better than in the past?
How many such casualties are you prepared to accept? How many such casualties will a flight crew be prepared to accept?
It's clear that you have no love for freedom. Why? It almost seems like you're willing to trade it for security (or security theater, as is the case with the TSA).
Terrorism aside, do I really want some drunken asshole who's been on a plane for the past 6 hours having any kind of knife?
It doesn't matter what you want. I might not want you to carry any water bottles on the plane because it stresses me out for unknown reasons, but that doesn't mean I should be able to have it stolen from you or some other such nonsense.
Not that I disagree, but shouldn't you be focusing on the bigger issue?
Maybe they are? I think a number of people who dislike the TSA want to eradicate it entirely (including me), so working towards that goal would probably fix all of the problems to begin with. All the rights violations are a concern, and there is at least one solution that would fix it all.
slashdot is mostly full of students and young people who have not realised that people earning a living is far more important than being able to watch whatever you like the name of some data wants to be free crusade.
By the way, throwing away rights (real property rights) and advocating for a system that inevitably causes censorship so that some people can be/feel safe (from poverty, in this case) is something I might attribute to a child, but that would just be silly. There are plenty of imbeciles in all age groups, and thanks to them, we have the lovely abomination that is the TSA (among other things). I believe your attitude of "freedom is less important than safety" is poisonous.
I should realise I am just wasting my breath though, slashdot is mostly full of students and young people who have not realised that people earning a living is far more important than being able to watch whatever you like the name of some data wants to be free crusade.
You're ferociously beating down those straw men.
When you grow up you will realise that some form of copyright law needs to exist.
How old must I be? I'm nearing 40.
By the way, I must commend you on your ability to see into the future! Who needs actual arguments when you have an ability like that? "When you grow up, you'll understand why you're wrong." Genius logic.
You will only see this though when you have a work of your own that is worth other people wanting to copy it and have a need to buy a house and feed your children.
Ah, so only people who directly benefit from copyright are correct.
You know it's a subjective matter, right? I don't, and likely won't, believe that copyright should exist. You're wasting your time
The capitalist world we live in at present is simply not ready to abandon copyright yet
Sure it is. There's no reason why it wouldn't be, other than that a large enough number of people don't want to abandon it.
but if all you are crying out for is a way of justifying bit torrent use on some bullshit moral stretch of logic you will never see them.
Really? Proponents of copyright seem to feel entitled to government-enforced monopolies over ideas. They use all sorts of ridiculous arguments to rationalize (TM) this entitlement.
Hey, see that? It's quite easy to make the Other Side (TM) seem like entitled brats, and nothing more.
As you get old you might realise that enjoying a movie you can't be arsed to pay for is just like stealing from the supermarket if you ever get the chance to get away with it.
So, how long do I have before I become an imbecile? Even the law itself doesn't treat theft and copyright infringement as the same thing, so why are you?
but it is depriving them of the revenue you SHOULD have paid them in order to watch the film.
"Should" is such a subjective word. I think we'll have to disagree that sending certain data around without any involvement from the ones who 'created' it entitles said 'creators' to money. But hey, that's what it means to be against government-enforced monopolies over ideas.
Maybe one day you'll grow up and realize that other adults are capable of disagreeing with you (See what I did there?).
You can sugar coat it any way you like
You can sugar coat government-enforced monopolies that promote censorship all you like, but chances are, you're not saying anything I haven't already heard before. Actually, it's not just that you're using old arguments that is the main problem; it's the constant insinuation that I must be a child for disagreeing with your views about copyright. That makes you look rather silly, you know.
Just performing live simply doesn't pay the bills enough as most of the revenue goes to the people who own the venue.
Stop feeling so entitled to a working business model (Again, did you notice how I worded that? See the similarities?). You make everything so simple!
Slashdot Mirror
If you have nothing to hide, AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW has nothing to hide, perhaps you'll be fine.
Well, what you need to hide changes as the government changes. Something perfectly okay to normal people may be considered evil by the government. 'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear' truly is nonsensical, as you said.
Maybe there's not much you can do with such simple subject matter, but I still feel the tests are still sorely lacking.
It appears designed to be relatively easy for good students.
It is often the case that "good students" are merely people who follow instructions, not necessarily people who are truly intelligent. I'll agree that the tests would be easy for people who actually understand the material, but that's not the problem; the problem is that many people can pass such tests by only memorizing facts. Of course, I don't think that memorization is always a bad thing (as some things need to be memorized), but the way we're having students in the public school system memorize material, rather than have them understand it, is seriously disappointing.
It seems to get worse and worse as the subject matter gets more complicated.
It's an non-ideal test for a non-ideal system
Of course.
Tests like these exist because there is a demand for "accountability" through quantitative and behavioral performance metrics. Their scale and desired uniformity require simple multiple choice exams, which in turn must test many small, concrete problems in using some common vocabulary.
NCLB only made this problem even worse. As I see it, our public school system has had these same problems (one-size-fits-all education, rote memorization, ridiculous testing, etc.) for a very long time.
Well, I agree with you that the problem is certainly not going to get better if we keep cutting funding like we are.
Any pussy who says they won't fly has been sucking on his momma's teets for too many years and needs to get out in the world and visit a 3rd world country to know what real suffering.
Those things called rights? Who cares about them!? The constitution? Just a worthless piece of paper, and anyone who complains is just a wimp.
Oh, and if I punch you in the face, you have no right to complain because I could've broken your arm instead!
And I do realize those are 4th grade tests, but what part of doing well on these tests proves that a student understands the materials? They're garbage, just like I said.
Blindly following procedures and tips is still rote memorization.
This [ed.gov] (PDF) doesn't seem like a memorization based exam to me...
Nor does this one [ed.gov]...
Are you blind? Those tests are garbage, and I could tell right off the bat.
Hopefully you're a mere troll. If you're not, then you're a freedom-hating imbecile.
Be truly rational and entertain the notion in your mind as a hypothesis that there is now or will be shortly something about the world that makes this measure necessary to countering acts of mass terrorism
Freedom is more important than safety, and history has shown us that people with power will abuse it. You're not rational at all if you're serious.
then people would fear consequences and there'd be push back.
But they don't push back when they get molested at airports? You're too optimistic; most people are imbeciles with no love for freedom.
You know that most people like to sleep well at night knowing they have a functional government that is doing everything necessary to prevent acts of War on American soil, right?
You mean by ruining other countries, molesting people at airports, spying on its own citizens, and generally ignoring the constitution? And you consider the people who want this to be "rational"? You're an imbecile, if so.
The only intelligent decision is to assume the government is abusing its powers. History has shown as that when you give someone too much power, they will abuse it. There is no reason to think otherwise.
I want small government, but I demand that we pointlessly interfere in other countries' affairs; that we spy on our own citizens without warrants or with secret warrants; that we shove people who we deem to be dangerous away in free speech zones; that we slap GPS tracking devices on people's cars; that we give certain people government-enforced monopolies that promote censorship and/or destroy real property rights; and that we grope everyone who tries to get on a plane because they might be terrorists. Yeah, I really adore small government; trust me.
It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.
He wasn't a very good liar.
satisfactory and so I'm forced to conclude that they are not acting in manner consistent with appropriate respect for my civil rights.
If they were acting in a manner consistent with appropriate respect for our civil rights, the TSA wouldn't exist at all. Whether or not a 4oz liquid bomb can be made, freedom is more important than safety. The problem with your comment is that it almost seems as if you would be willing to give up your freedoms if it would truly keep you safe, and that absolutely should not be the case. Or maybe it just seemed that way, and you wouldn't actually do that, but I still feel the need to stress that point.
I'm willing to extend some amount of trust to our elected leaders
Given history, that is not a good idea. The ability to act in secrecy (whether or not they tell you why and give probable reasons) will be abused; bet on it.
You must be quite selfish to not care if they violate other people's rights. That's what I get out of your comment. Even if they're not watching me specifically, the violation of anyone's rights is a big concern.
And?
Do we really want to use the same tests that can be passed by merely memorizing the material to determine if students are doing better than in the past?
I'm not entirely sure that letting one test determine your future is entirely wise
Especially when most of these tests are just garbage that can be passed by memorizing the material; understanding is not required.
How many such casualties are you prepared to accept? How many such casualties will a flight crew be prepared to accept?
It's clear that you have no love for freedom. Why? It almost seems like you're willing to trade it for security (or security theater, as is the case with the TSA).
Terrorism aside, do I really want some drunken asshole who's been on a plane for the past 6 hours having any kind of knife?
It doesn't matter what you want. I might not want you to carry any water bottles on the plane because it stresses me out for unknown reasons, but that doesn't mean I should be able to have it stolen from you or some other such nonsense.
We wouldn't need the TSA even if what he said turned out to be false. Freedom > security.
Not that I disagree, but shouldn't you be focusing on the bigger issue?
Maybe they are? I think a number of people who dislike the TSA want to eradicate it entirely (including me), so working towards that goal would probably fix all of the problems to begin with. All the rights violations are a concern, and there is at least one solution that would fix it all.
slashdot is mostly full of students and young people who have not realised that people earning a living is far more important than being able to watch whatever you like the name of some data wants to be free crusade.
By the way, throwing away rights (real property rights) and advocating for a system that inevitably causes censorship so that some people can be/feel safe (from poverty, in this case) is something I might attribute to a child, but that would just be silly. There are plenty of imbeciles in all age groups, and thanks to them, we have the lovely abomination that is the TSA (among other things). I believe your attitude of "freedom is less important than safety" is poisonous.
I should realise I am just wasting my breath though, slashdot is mostly full of students and young people who have not realised that people earning a living is far more important than being able to watch whatever you like the name of some data wants to be free crusade.
You're ferociously beating down those straw men.
When you grow up you will realise that some form of copyright law needs to exist.
How old must I be? I'm nearing 40.
By the way, I must commend you on your ability to see into the future! Who needs actual arguments when you have an ability like that? "When you grow up, you'll understand why you're wrong." Genius logic.
You will only see this though when you have a work of your own that is worth other people wanting to copy it and have a need to buy a house and feed your children.
Ah, so only people who directly benefit from copyright are correct.
You know it's a subjective matter, right? I don't, and likely won't, believe that copyright should exist. You're wasting your time
The capitalist world we live in at present is simply not ready to abandon copyright yet
Sure it is. There's no reason why it wouldn't be, other than that a large enough number of people don't want to abandon it.
but if all you are crying out for is a way of justifying bit torrent use on some bullshit moral stretch of logic you will never see them.
Really? Proponents of copyright seem to feel entitled to government-enforced monopolies over ideas. They use all sorts of ridiculous arguments to rationalize (TM) this entitlement.
Hey, see that? It's quite easy to make the Other Side (TM) seem like entitled brats, and nothing more.
As you get old you might realise that enjoying a movie you can't be arsed to pay for is just like stealing from the supermarket if you ever get the chance to get away with it.
So, how long do I have before I become an imbecile? Even the law itself doesn't treat theft and copyright infringement as the same thing, so why are you?
but it is depriving them of the revenue you SHOULD have paid them in order to watch the film.
"Should" is such a subjective word. I think we'll have to disagree that sending certain data around without any involvement from the ones who 'created' it entitles said 'creators' to money. But hey, that's what it means to be against government-enforced monopolies over ideas.
Maybe one day you'll grow up and realize that other adults are capable of disagreeing with you (See what I did there?).
You can sugar coat it any way you like
You can sugar coat government-enforced monopolies that promote censorship all you like, but chances are, you're not saying anything I haven't already heard before. Actually, it's not just that you're using old arguments that is the main problem; it's the constant insinuation that I must be a child for disagreeing with your views about copyright. That makes you look rather silly, you know.
Just performing live simply doesn't pay the bills enough as most of the revenue goes to the people who own the venue.
Stop feeling so entitled to a working business model (Again, did you notice how I worded that? See the similarities?). You make everything so simple!
I would think rights are important to more people than just Slashdot readers. Is this not the case, or are most people imbeciles, as I often fear?
Are conditions really bad enough to stop people flying?
People's rights are violated when they try to get on a plane. What do you think the answer is?
The problem isn't the TSA
Just because you've had different experiences doesn't mean the problem isn't the TSA.