Actually, you're right. Maybe the world's foremost expert on bullying, Dan Olweus, has argued (and shown convincingly through intervention studies) that most bullying comes from the bully's desire for power and status, and not anything the victim does. If you were "better at reading social cues", the bully might pick another victim, but he'd still pick a victim. Intervention needs to be targeted at getting the bully to change, mainly through serious sanctions. Programs to get the victim to change don't work, at least not from a school-level perspective.
(There is a rarer kind of bullying, where the victim is aggressive and attention-seeking, and gets ostracized for being too "noisy" - a failed bid for status. They're the exception to the above.)
What BS is this? Of course you can teach your own kids. But the kids also have a right to a full-worthy elementary education, so if you are to be the ONLY provider of education to your kids, then you need to demonstrate that you can give that somehow. Isn't this true even in the US?
I try to imagine an ethics lesson involving a buddhist vampire talking about thrupenny bits and raspberry ripples. It sound like it could have been fun, at least.
No, other people do it, and the time it takes probably doesn't compare to the time it takes actually teaching your child (few home-schoolers hold full-time jobs!)
I don't know how I would do teaching other people's children, especially in a classroom setting. But my own son, I know very well - I've followed his developments in a way no teacher can dream of. I know how he thinks, how he expresses himself, and we share a lot of low-level interests and preferences due to common genes and culture. I don't doubt that I could have given him a full-worthy elementary education if I worked full-time on it (like I understand most homeschoolers do).
> First, they are private. They can turn people away.
Not where I live, probably not most places. They can not turn away kids for being too poor, or too stupid, or living in the wrong neighbourhoods. AFAIK, they can't even turn away people for having the wrong world view (although they can possibly give priority to catholics if there are too many applicants). I know of atheists who have sent their children to catholic schools.
Finance isn't much of an issue either here, private idealistic schools are subsidized. Although they recieve less funds than public schools from the state, the cost per month was around 35$ last time I checked. I understand religious schools recieve subsidies in Britain as well, and probably other European countries are similar.
The key issue, I think, is that to send kids to a private school, you have to make a deliberate choice. Not all who care about their children send them to private schools, but those who don't care always go with the default, which is public... having a few kids from a negligent family environment in each class really harms the rest.
I haven't seen anyone saying they did this. What they did was attack some of Google's customers, specifically some who work for human rights in China. Granted, since it was a hacking attempt at Google itself, they could probably have gone for code instead, but that's not what happened.
China's reputation for industrial espionage may or may not be especially deserved. Their human rights record, however, there is little dispute of.
Dawkins himself was for a very long time most ardent in rejecting endosymbiosis, arguably the first major instance of "non-darwinian" evolution that was found.
Ethel was. She was implicated as much to get Julius to confess as any reasonable suspicion. Unfortunately, he didn't, so they had to execute both to save face. International politics is charming, eh?
Boo! That's not why we have Google. There are a billion companies which will do that for you. Google the company for fantasizing about space elevators and still managing to be insanely profitable in their spare time.
Agreed, they are being ripped off. Thing is, a celebrity company looks good on your CV... the problem is that celebrity companies know that, and exploit it. It's harder to write "Member of GTA programming team" on your CV if you didn't leave on amiable terms - and they may not let you do that.
Going with the lowest bidder is fine, as long as there are few unknowns and you can use statistical process control or similar old, reliable means of quality assurance. But the WTFs I have seen in our area of business nonetheless makes me uncomfortable. If there is a crack in the quality control regime, and sufficient competition, and money can be saved by exploiting that crack, then it will be exploited.
(A separate issue is that winner's curse means that honest low bidders often go out of business, and leave their more corrupt competitors behind.)
Considering one user here in this thread has admitted to starting his terminal with ctrl-alt insert, I can imagine it does happen. But I still disagree with Ubuntu. When my X server freezes I can't just quickly look up the documentation to find out what Ubuntu's preference for "kill X button" is (and people who bind stuff to ctrl-alt [anywhere near bksp] deserve what they get anyway!)
But if TheCrashingAppThatTakesYourComputerHostage has control over your display and/or keyboard when it crashes (it seems every other SDL app does this, parachute or not), you need to remember those SysRq key combos.
Yes, I remember that. We got the windows key around the same time we started playing Quake over null-modem cables. We called it the "instant lose" button.
Yeah, me too. It turned out ATI dropped support for my graphics card in the proprietary drivers (even though the laptop it's in was new 2 years ago). It took a lot of freezes and sysrqing until I realized it just wouldn't work.
I am of the school of thought that an action is either good or evil in itself (or to be precise, "permissible" or "wrong") and that consequences arising out of it are less important, especially when these "consequences" are a result of other people's deliberate choices.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're right. Maybe the world's foremost expert on bullying, Dan Olweus, has argued (and shown convincingly through intervention studies) that most bullying comes from the bully's desire for power and status, and not anything the victim does. If you were "better at reading social cues", the bully might pick another victim, but he'd still pick a victim.
Intervention needs to be targeted at getting the bully to change, mainly through serious sanctions. Programs to get the victim to change don't work, at least not from a school-level perspective.
(There is a rarer kind of bullying, where the victim is aggressive and attention-seeking, and gets ostracized for being too "noisy" - a failed bid for status. They're the exception to the above.)
Source: Dan Olweus, "Mobbing i skolen", 2001.
I think Watterson looks like Calvin's uncle Max.
That is one way, yes. Germany has chosen a different one (or more likely, an additional one).
Why would it be because of you? I wasn't going to blame Transmeta's failure on you, but since you said that, I may have to suspect you anyway.
> the privilege of teaching your own kids.
What BS is this? Of course you can teach your own kids. But the kids also have a right to a full-worthy elementary education, so if you are to be the ONLY provider of education to your kids, then you need to demonstrate that you can give that somehow. Isn't this true even in the US?
I try to imagine an ethics lesson involving a buddhist vampire talking about thrupenny bits and raspberry ripples. It sound like it could have been fun, at least.
> In Europe, the greater part of the yought and population is already watching English TV, reading English books and listening to English music
In Germany, it seems to me they dub and translate everything.
No, other people do it, and the time it takes probably doesn't compare to the time it takes actually teaching your child (few home-schoolers hold full-time jobs!)
I don't know how I would do teaching other people's children, especially in a classroom setting. But my own son, I know very well - I've followed his developments in a way no teacher can dream of. I know how he thinks, how he expresses himself, and we share a lot of low-level interests and preferences due to common genes and culture. I don't doubt that I could have given him a full-worthy elementary education if I worked full-time on it (like I understand most homeschoolers do).
> First, they are private. They can turn people away.
Not where I live, probably not most places. They can not turn away kids for being too poor, or too stupid, or living in the wrong neighbourhoods. AFAIK, they can't even turn away people for having the wrong world view (although they can possibly give priority to catholics if there are too many applicants). I know of atheists who have sent their children to catholic schools.
Finance isn't much of an issue either here, private idealistic schools are subsidized. Although they recieve less funds than public schools from the state, the cost per month was around 35$ last time I checked. I understand religious schools recieve subsidies in Britain as well, and probably other European countries are similar.
The key issue, I think, is that to send kids to a private school, you have to make a deliberate choice. Not all who care about their children send them to private schools, but those who don't care always go with the default, which is public... having a few kids from a negligent family environment in each class really harms the rest.
> they stole some of Google's propriety code
I haven't seen anyone saying they did this. What they did was attack some of Google's customers, specifically some who work for human rights in China. Granted, since it was a hacking attempt at Google itself, they could probably have gone for code instead, but that's not what happened.
China's reputation for industrial espionage may or may not be especially deserved. Their human rights record, however, there is little dispute of.
Dawkins himself was for a very long time most ardent in rejecting endosymbiosis, arguably the first major instance of "non-darwinian" evolution that was found.
And what a useless Wonder.
Ethel was. She was implicated as much to get Julius to confess as any reasonable suspicion. Unfortunately, he didn't, so they had to execute both to save face. International politics is charming, eh?
Boo! That's not why we have Google. There are a billion companies which will do that for you. Google the company for fantasizing about space elevators and still managing to be insanely profitable in their spare time.
Agreed, they are being ripped off. Thing is, a celebrity company looks good on your CV... the problem is that celebrity companies know that, and exploit it. It's harder to write "Member of GTA programming team" on your CV if you didn't leave on amiable terms - and they may not let you do that.
Going with the lowest bidder is fine, as long as there are few unknowns and you can use statistical process control or similar old, reliable means of quality assurance. But the WTFs I have seen in our area of business nonetheless makes me uncomfortable. If there is a crack in the quality control regime, and sufficient competition, and money can be saved by exploiting that crack, then it will be exploited.
(A separate issue is that winner's curse means that honest low bidders often go out of business, and leave their more corrupt competitors behind.)
BS. They don't even share a language, they have four. They do share dedication to the ideals of their state, but that's about it.
Yeah, but in a completely different part of the world.
Considering one user here in this thread has admitted to starting his terminal with ctrl-alt insert, I can imagine it does happen. But I still disagree with Ubuntu. When my X server freezes I can't just quickly look up the documentation to find out what Ubuntu's preference for "kill X button" is (and people who bind stuff to ctrl-alt [anywhere near bksp] deserve what they get anyway!)
But if TheCrashingAppThatTakesYourComputerHostage has control over your display and/or keyboard when it crashes (it seems every other SDL app does this, parachute or not), you need to remember those SysRq key combos.
> (it is wonderful and works from within games)
Yes, I remember that. We got the windows key around the same time we started playing Quake over null-modem cables. We called it the "instant lose" button.
Yeah, me too. It turned out ATI dropped support for my graphics card in the proprietary drivers (even though the laptop it's in was new 2 years ago). It took a lot of freezes and sysrqing until I realized it just wouldn't work.
It would be very cool if it was some kind of extinct megafauna, although even that is pretty bloody unlikely.
I am of the school of thought that an action is either good or evil in itself (or to be precise, "permissible" or "wrong") and that consequences arising out of it are less important, especially when these "consequences" are a result of other people's deliberate choices.