Here's a short list of a few possible simulation-type projects.
Spaceship physics: have them build a simple simulator for 2-D physics. A simple project would have a ship with a location, a direction and a velocity. The ship could turn and give itself a "kick", i.e., increase its velocity in the direction its pointing by a given amount.
Such a project would teach them both programming and some basic physics. The main stumbling block for this and all similar projects is the need for 2d graphics. You need a good and simple toolkit for this, because you don't want them to waste lots of time on the graphics, at least not initially.
More Spaceship Physics: you can extend the previous project in a number of ways: gravity (either little planets which act as point-sources, or a downward-gravity model to look more like the earth.) You can easily turn one of these into a simple game, either a shoot-em-up or something more problem-oriented (like Lunar Landar).
Cat and mouse: This is similar in style to the spaceship ones. The idea here is to have two (or more) creatures where one chases the other. You need to give them different skills to make this interesting. Thus, you can have a mouse that works by sight: it runs always directly away from the cat. The cat is faster but uses the sense of smell: it keeps on walking forwards, but as soon as it sense that it's getting farther away from the mouse, it picks a random direction.
There are millions of cute variations on this kind of game. You can also have competitions where students have different "senses" and speeds, and need to program the best possible creature with those sense.
These projects can range from very challenging to not-so-hard depending on how much you do for them and what programming language they're using. Doing any of these from scratch is a seroius project for you average high-schooler. But these are fun and have the advantage of requiring problem solving and teaching simple vector calculations to boot. If you want more info, email me (yminsky@cs.cornell.edu). I've played with all these projects myself, and my father taught a class once for high school teachers on how to integrate such projects into their classes.
The main issue here is that the administration is requesting the right to use SEALED warrants, i.e., they want to be able to break into your machine without telling you about it, if a Judge says its OK.
Frankly, I don't see how else you can do it. "Hello sir. I have a warrant and I am now going to use it to remotely break into your machine." Obviously, the first thing the person with the computer does is yank out the network cord.
I think that breaking into someone's computer isn't so unlike using eavesdropping techniques. Yes, breaking in to a computer is in some sense intrusive, but it's a hell of a lot less intrusive than breaking into your house. So, just like you can do a secret wiretapping with a warrant, I think you should probably be able to do secret computer break-in with a warrant.
I find the rabid opposition in some quarters to a tax on internet transactions to be very odd. I think the argument for taxing internet transactions (as well as mail-order) is clear.
First, let's assume that sales taxes are a reasonable way for states to raise money. Given that, isn't it odd that internet transactions are exempted from state sales tax? In fact, the current exemption for such transactions amounts to the tax code preferring interstate transactions over in-state transactions.
When the tax code encourages something, you get more of it, so the tax code will push more transactions web-ward. This will eventually seriously erode the state's tax base, which is a real problem.
The solution seems clear: set an interstate sales tax rate that is close to the average state sales tax rate. Then, via some formula, divide the revenue between the two states involved in the transaction (i.e., the vendor's state and the buyer's state.)
This hardly seems like a mad power-grab by the government. Just a sensible way to regularize the tax system.
I think ESR's note itself is an interesting comment on why he is such a controversial figure. It's a very smooth piece of writing, and it's clear from a lot of these Slashdot posts that many people haven't fully groked his piece.
You'll note that nothing he wrote makes it look particularly likely that he's going to retire anytime soon. Indeed, it seems like one of his main points is that the job he's doing is one that requires some pretty hard-to-find qualifications. And, you'll notice what his punch-line is: if you can't do it, then stop being such a mean-spiritied critic.
And this brings it back to why ESR is so controversial: he's very slick. He wants to reprimand his critics, and he does so, while slicking past most of his audience that much of his point is to reprimand his critics (Bruce, are you listening?)
Personally, I don't mind ESR too much, and I don't take him too seriously. I think he has been filling a useful function, and I think, despite his protestations, that he probably likes the self-aggrandizement that goes along with it. But that's par for the course and I for one am not complaining.
But I don't think of what he says as gospel, and I understand why he makes some people nervous.
Slashdot Mirror
- Spaceship physics: have them build a simple simulator for 2-D physics. A simple project would have a ship with a location, a direction and a velocity. The ship could turn and give itself a "kick", i.e., increase its velocity in the direction its pointing by a given amount.
- More Spaceship Physics: you can extend the previous project in a number of ways: gravity (either little planets which act as point-sources, or a downward-gravity model to look more like the earth.) You can easily turn one of these into a simple game, either a shoot-em-up or something more problem-oriented (like Lunar Landar).
- Cat and mouse: This is similar in style to the spaceship ones. The idea here is to have two (or more) creatures where one chases the other. You need to give them different skills to make this interesting. Thus, you can have a mouse that works by sight: it runs always directly away from the cat. The cat is faster but uses the sense of smell: it keeps on walking forwards, but as soon as it sense that it's getting farther away from the mouse, it picks a random direction.
These projects can range from very challenging to not-so-hard depending on how much you do for them and what programming language they're using. Doing any of these from scratch is a seroius project for you average high-schooler. But these are fun and have the advantage of requiring problem solving and teaching simple vector calculations to boot. If you want more info, email me (yminsky@cs.cornell.edu). I've played with all these projects myself, and my father taught a class once for high school teachers on how to integrate such projects into their classes.Such a project would teach them both programming and some basic physics. The main stumbling block for this and all similar projects is the need for 2d graphics. You need a good and simple toolkit for this, because you don't want them to waste lots of time on the graphics, at least not initially.
There are millions of cute variations on this kind of game. You can also have competitions where students have different "senses" and speeds, and need to program the best possible creature with those sense.
The main issue here is that the administration is requesting the right to use SEALED warrants, i.e., they want to be able to break into your machine without telling you about it, if a Judge says its OK.
Frankly, I don't see how else you can do it. "Hello sir. I have a warrant and I am now going to use it to remotely break into your machine." Obviously, the first thing the person with the computer does is yank out the network cord.
I think that breaking into someone's computer isn't so unlike using eavesdropping techniques. Yes, breaking in to a computer is in some sense intrusive, but it's a hell of a lot less intrusive than breaking into your house. So, just like you can do a secret wiretapping with a warrant, I think you should probably be able to do secret computer break-in with a warrant.
I find the rabid opposition in some quarters to a tax on internet transactions to be very odd. I think the argument for taxing internet transactions (as well as mail-order) is clear.
First, let's assume that sales taxes are a reasonable way for states to raise money. Given that, isn't it odd that internet transactions are exempted from state sales tax? In fact, the current exemption for such transactions amounts to the tax code preferring interstate transactions over in-state transactions.
When the tax code encourages something, you get more of it, so the tax code will push more transactions web-ward. This will eventually seriously erode the state's tax base, which is a real problem.
The solution seems clear: set an interstate sales tax rate that is close to the average state sales tax rate. Then, via some formula, divide the revenue between the two states involved in the transaction (i.e., the vendor's state and the buyer's state.)
This hardly seems like a mad power-grab by the government. Just a sensible way to regularize the tax system.
Are your replying to my comments? Certainly none of this surprises me. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
I think ESR's note itself is an interesting comment on why he is such a controversial figure. It's a very smooth piece of writing, and it's clear from a lot of these Slashdot posts that many people haven't fully groked his piece.
You'll note that nothing he wrote makes it look particularly likely that he's going to retire anytime soon. Indeed, it seems like one of his main points is that the job he's doing is one that requires some pretty hard-to-find qualifications. And, you'll notice what his punch-line is: if you can't do it, then stop being such a mean-spiritied critic.
And this brings it back to why ESR is so controversial: he's very slick. He wants to reprimand his critics, and he does so, while slicking past most of his audience that much of his point is to reprimand his critics (Bruce, are you listening?)
Personally, I don't mind ESR too much, and I don't take him too seriously. I think he has been filling a useful function, and I think, despite his protestations, that he probably likes the self-aggrandizement that goes along with it. But that's par for the course and I for one am not complaining.
But I don't think of what he says as gospel, and I understand why he makes some people nervous.