That doesn't mean she didn't know the subject - that means that she's teaching poorly because she hasn't prepared properly. As a math professor, you damn well do you example problems *before* class so you're prepared to do them correctly in class.
Obviously some math is necessary for everyone to learn, the cutoff point is probably around the algebra-precalc area where learning more isn't going to help anyone who isn't considering pursuing a science or engineering degree.
A lot of people seem to think this way, and they're wrong. All you've learned at that point for math is basic arithmetic (which is socially essential but horrifically boring) and common algebra, which is only mathematically relevant as an eventual precursor to calculus.
What most people don't realize is that there are whole branches of mathematics that are interesting and useful that don't depend on common algebra at all. Some of them don't even depend on arithmetic. To me, your take on mathematical education sounds a lot like "I read the first Harry Potter book and didn't really like it. I don't think I want to read the second one, therefore English Literature isn't for me."
Am one of those people you have to draw a diagram for.
The only difference between people like you and the people who are "really good at math" is that they can visualize the diagram by themselves. There are some people who can pass math courses by memorizing formulas and pattern matching them to problems; a lot of math teachers (especially women) learned that way, and so they try to teach to that learning style. Problem is, with that learning style you never really learn the math, you just memorize formulas. It's that teaching style that makes man people who are *innately good at math* hate the subject.
If every kid with an A from that teacher that goes to the university shows with knowing a fair bit of physics, it might just help the next kid who applies with that A in the transcript.
Problem is, all a college admission department gets to see is grades. They have *no idea* how good a student was at physics when they showed up - all they know is the grade they got in highschool physics and then the grade they later got in college physics. Those numbers are probably correlated with acceptance-time physics skill, but that correlation is probably well below the noise level created by other factors.
One way to solve that problem would be to have skill-evaluators that interview new students when they are accepted to a college. "If I had the acceleration of an object in meters per second per second, how would I calculate the object's position at a given point in time? Formulas? Can you show me on this whiteboard? Where did you learn that? From a teacher in High School? What was his name? What else did he cover?"
At the community college I went to they gathered some information like that in admission testing, especially for math placement. But they used automated computer tests and it didn't provide them with any detail on where students learned things, just on how well they could perform on an automated test.
go to year-round schooling with longer non-summer seasonal breaks
Bullshit. Maybe "make add more vacations", but requiring kids to spend more of their year in school is absurd. Kids need enough time off so they can actually stop thinking about school, ad the two and a half months they get now for summer vacation is barely enough for that.
that's contrary to the ideals of free software. if the FSF considers that ok then we need a new license which ensures software (and hardware) freedom.
You're clearly just trolling. The assertion that the ideals of free software require the user to be able to reprogram an ASIC or ROM on the fly is absurd. What's next? Rocks steal our freedom because we can't turn them into birds with our psychic powers?
If it gets to the point where, in practice, all computer processors are implemented on user-reprogrammable FPGAs or something, then we'll need to have a discussion about the freedom to modify software-implemented hardware. But, as always, free software is about giving the end users freedoms that are possible - not demanding absurdities.
If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
I'd say that providing the code in the form of physical hardware would be covered pretty cleanly by that last sentence.
the GPL isn't about free it's about FREEDOM -- the rights of the end user to modify the program. Will I, as an end user of a GPL processor, be able to modify the processor? This looks like yet another big company abusing the spirit, if not the letter, of the GPL.
Yes. You, the end user, can modify the processor to the extent that is possible for the technology involved. Since a processor is physical hardware, that means the "compilation" phase for modification involves a microprocessor fab. If you don't have one, that sucks - but it's not something that's possible to fix.
Even Richard Stallman, and even the GPLv3, wouldn't complain about you not owning a fab (and therefore not being able to use a modified UltraSparc T2 in practice) as a freedom issue. This isn't like Tivoization, because Sun can't patch your physical hardware either.
Either 32-bit Firefox or nspluginwrapper will work, and I believe there is a repository that has nspluginwrapper.
If Ubuntu worked "correctly", all you'd need to do is type in "apt-get install flashplayer-nonfree" and it would automatically figure out how to do that. If nspluginwrapper is stable, it'd use that. Otherwise, it'd install some firefox32 package that replaced the default 64 bit firefox.
As for win32codecs, I'll have to go look at it again. The last time I looked at the problem, about 6 months ago, it was an utter mess to play wmv9 on Ubuntu amd64.
I agree. In fact, I really wish Ubuntu made this easier...
The fact that installing 32-bit Firefox, and 32 bit xine, and 32 bit mplayer, and 32 bit flashplayer-nonfree, and 32 bit win32codecs aren't all really simple using the standard package manager is absolutely a bug in Ubuntu amd64. I agree that Gentoo does much better in that regard.
Still, working around that bug by installing i686 Ubuntu basically has no downside for normal desktop users with less than 3 gigs of RAM.
Why take precautions for a _highly_ unlikely scenario, and ignore a probable scenario?
Because the likely scenario is politically charged. It's not that meteor impacts are being funded instead of global warming, it's that global warming is being intentionally ignored. That's a real issue - but it has nothing to do with this article.
The chances of getting hit by an asteroid are extremely small.
That's true. The potential damage from getting hit is very, very large though - and the probability isn't quite small enough to completely discount. Major meteor impacts have occurred with some frequency on a geological time scale - it seems prudent to actually do the risk assessment and take appropriate action if necessary.
As for the foreign energy independence issue, sure that's important. That doesn't mean that astronomers who specialize in asteroids should drop their careers for it any more than you should drop your career (whatever it is) to worry about potential meteor impacts.
It is also essential to get those high homicide rates. Your call.
If the choice is between something that's essential to freedom and lowering homicide rates, it's a damn easy choice: freedom. If you aren't willing to chose freedom in a case like that, I suggest you move to Singapore - they seem to have a functioning society based on a culture that doesn't value freedom highly.
It's possible that gun ownership isn't essential to freedom. That's a worthwhile discussion. But if you're willing to accept that something is essential to freedom and then trade it away, I don't want you in my country.
The question is: Is there any significant disadvantage once I'm done setting up their box?
I agree. That's exactly what the question should be in that case.
And yes - there is a non-trivial disadvantage to doing things the nspluginwrapper way rather than using a simple package from the repositories: upgrades. This is exactly the same issue as with Automatix, if you ignore the package system then the package system can no longer to do everything correctly and automatically.
Further, flash isn't the only issue with 64-bit Ubuntu. There are still a number of packages in the universe repository that haven't been properly ported to amd64 yet and either behave strangely or crash all over the place.
Try this: Consider explaining the flash on 64-bit issue, in detail, to the person who's getting this Ubuntu install. If they wouldn't think the explanation itself is interesting (... and binary plugins from a different archetecture won't work...), just give them the 32 bit OS.
Not quite. If the source isn't included, there needs to be a written offer that *says* the source code is available. For GPLv2, that written offer must be for a mail order version of the source rather than a network delivered version.
Actually, that doesn't work. If it did, I would have suggested it.
Before you can install libdvdcss2 through apt on Ubuntu, you need to enable the custom mediabuntu repository. Enabling a custom repository through the GUI is so much blatantly more work than pasting a single terminal command, I just decided to show the easy way.
You're a Gentoo user. That means you're willing to go through quite a bit of effort to get things to work exactly the way you want them, and that if you break something you're willing to take full responsibility for fixing it. I can relate - I ran Gentoo for a year. Eventually I decided that even though I *can* fix pretty much any issue that comes up, that doesn't mean that I want to do that all the time. Even among Linux users, most people will never understand the system well enough to even do a Gentoo Stage1 install. And that's OK.
There exist people who aren't computer geeks. There are even computer geeks who aren't Linux experts. They should absolutely learn more about their computers, but forcing them to tinker with their system just to get flash to work right just so they can say "I'm running a 64 bit OS" isn't a good idea. If they want to make that decision in full knowledge of the deal they're making, great - but I'd much rather they saw a 32 bit distro where "normal", "simple" things like flash just worked.
If the reason for making them go through contortions to get flash was to point out that flash is evil propretary crap, that would at least be arguable - but the real world benefits of a 64 bit OS for normal desktop computing with under 3 gigs of RAM is effectively zero.
You can do lots of stuff. That's not the question.
The question is this: Does your non-technical friend who you're foisting Linux on want to figure out nspluginwrapper or how to run a 32-bit version of Firefox just to get flash working? Is it worth forcing them to deal with that stuff at all for no visible advantages?
That stuff's all true. Thing is - a non-technical user who's running non-CPU-bound tasks could care less. It's great that you, as a geek, know that stuff - but a little bit more efficient CPU usage is no reason to screw a non-technical user out of Flash.
I really wish that the performance gains were so blatantly obvious that even non-technical users would give up flash / win32codecs rather than use a 32-bit OS, but the fact of the matter is they can't tell the difference. So there's no reason to (from a non-technical) cripple a friend's computer for a purely-theoretical performance gain.
That's really neat, but it's not the least bit appropriate for non-technical users. Even for users who are capible of using it, it should be considered experimental - what it's doing is probably safe, but it's the first thing I'd blame weird package system / upgrade problems on if I were using it.
Not only that, but you can also run the 32-bit versions of your programs on a 64-bit OS install. In the case of Flash, just install the 32-bit version of Firefox, then all your 32-bit plugins will work fine.
I run the 32 bit version of Firefox on 64-bit Ubuntu for flash myself, but there's no reason to force non-technical users to screw with that sort of thing. Non-technical users on computers with up to 3 gigs of RAM should get a 32 bit OS. Anything else is just making things hard for them for no good reason.
Is there a reason we shouldn't use the full feature set of our processors?
Yea. There is. Flash doesn't work out of the box, nor do 32 bit non-native video codecs.
Until you go over 3 gigs of RAM, all of the benifits of 64 bit Linux over 32 bit Linux are basically invisible and irrelevant for a normal desktop user. Sure, running a 64bit OS is cool - but your non-technical friend won't care one bit when they can't watch the multimedia they want hassle free.
Slashdot Mirror
That'd be great, if geeks really billed for fixing their friend's computers. I really should start doing that. Seriously.
That doesn't mean she didn't know the subject - that means that she's teaching poorly because she hasn't prepared properly. As a math professor, you damn well do you example problems *before* class so you're prepared to do them correctly in class.
A lot of people seem to think this way, and they're wrong. All you've learned at that point for math is basic arithmetic (which is socially essential but horrifically boring) and common algebra, which is only mathematically relevant as an eventual precursor to calculus.
What most people don't realize is that there are whole branches of mathematics that are interesting and useful that don't depend on common algebra at all. Some of them don't even depend on arithmetic. To me, your take on mathematical education sounds a lot like "I read the first Harry Potter book and didn't really like it. I don't think I want to read the second one, therefore English Literature isn't for me."
The only difference between people like you and the people who are "really good at math" is that they can visualize the diagram by themselves. There are some people who can pass math courses by memorizing formulas and pattern matching them to problems; a lot of math teachers (especially women) learned that way, and so they try to teach to that learning style. Problem is, with that learning style you never really learn the math, you just memorize formulas. It's that teaching style that makes man people who are *innately good at math* hate the subject.
Problem is, all a college admission department gets to see is grades. They have *no idea* how good a student was at physics when they showed up - all they know is the grade they got in highschool physics and then the grade they later got in college physics. Those numbers are probably correlated with acceptance-time physics skill, but that correlation is probably well below the noise level created by other factors.
One way to solve that problem would be to have skill-evaluators that interview new students when they are accepted to a college. "If I had the acceleration of an object in meters per second per second, how would I calculate the object's position at a given point in time? Formulas? Can you show me on this whiteboard? Where did you learn that? From a teacher in High School? What was his name? What else did he cover?"
At the community college I went to they gathered some information like that in admission testing, especially for math placement. But they used automated computer tests and it didn't provide them with any detail on where students learned things, just on how well they could perform on an automated test.
This is clearly backwards. It's the schools that are doing poorly that need more money, not the schools that are already doing well.
Logically, the next step after making your statement would be to demonstrate that a good standardized test is possible. Please do so now.
Bullshit. Maybe "make add more vacations", but requiring kids to spend more of their year in school is absurd. Kids need enough time off so they can actually stop thinking about school, ad the two and a half months they get now for summer vacation is barely enough for that.
You're clearly just trolling. The assertion that the ideals of free software require the user to be able to reprogram an ASIC or ROM on the fly is absurd. What's next? Rocks steal our freedom because we can't turn them into birds with our psychic powers?
If it gets to the point where, in practice, all computer processors are implemented on user-reprogrammable FPGAs or something, then we'll need to have a discussion about the freedom to modify software-implemented hardware. But, as always, free software is about giving the end users freedoms that are possible - not demanding absurdities.
From the GPLv3:
If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
I'd say that providing the code in the form of physical hardware would be covered pretty cleanly by that last sentence.
Yes. You, the end user, can modify the processor to the extent that is possible for the technology involved. Since a processor is physical hardware, that means the "compilation" phase for modification involves a microprocessor fab. If you don't have one, that sucks - but it's not something that's possible to fix.
Even Richard Stallman, and even the GPLv3, wouldn't complain about you not owning a fab (and therefore not being able to use a modified UltraSparc T2 in practice) as a freedom issue. This isn't like Tivoization, because Sun can't patch your physical hardware either.
If Ubuntu worked "correctly", all you'd need to do is type in "apt-get install flashplayer-nonfree" and it would automatically figure out how to do that. If nspluginwrapper is stable, it'd use that. Otherwise, it'd install some firefox32 package that replaced the default 64 bit firefox.
As for win32codecs, I'll have to go look at it again. The last time I looked at the problem, about 6 months ago, it was an utter mess to play wmv9 on Ubuntu amd64.
The fact that installing 32-bit Firefox, and 32 bit xine, and 32 bit mplayer, and 32 bit flashplayer-nonfree, and 32 bit win32codecs aren't all really simple using the standard package manager is absolutely a bug in Ubuntu amd64. I agree that Gentoo does much better in that regard.
Still, working around that bug by installing i686 Ubuntu basically has no downside for normal desktop users with less than 3 gigs of RAM.
Because the likely scenario is politically charged. It's not that meteor impacts are being funded instead of global warming, it's that global warming is being intentionally ignored. That's a real issue - but it has nothing to do with this article.
That's true. The potential damage from getting hit is very, very large though - and the probability isn't quite small enough to completely discount. Major meteor impacts have occurred with some frequency on a geological time scale - it seems prudent to actually do the risk assessment and take appropriate action if necessary.
As for the foreign energy independence issue, sure that's important. That doesn't mean that astronomers who specialize in asteroids should drop their careers for it any more than you should drop your career (whatever it is) to worry about potential meteor impacts.
If the choice is between something that's essential to freedom and lowering homicide rates, it's a damn easy choice: freedom. If you aren't willing to chose freedom in a case like that, I suggest you move to Singapore - they seem to have a functioning society based on a culture that doesn't value freedom highly.
It's possible that gun ownership isn't essential to freedom. That's a worthwhile discussion. But if you're willing to accept that something is essential to freedom and then trade it away, I don't want you in my country.
I agree. That's exactly what the question should be in that case.
And yes - there is a non-trivial disadvantage to doing things the nspluginwrapper way rather than using a simple package from the repositories: upgrades. This is exactly the same issue as with Automatix, if you ignore the package system then the package system can no longer to do everything correctly and automatically.
Further, flash isn't the only issue with 64-bit Ubuntu. There are still a number of packages in the universe repository that haven't been properly ported to amd64 yet and either behave strangely or crash all over the place.
Try this: Consider explaining the flash on 64-bit issue, in detail, to the person who's getting this Ubuntu install. If they wouldn't think the explanation itself is interesting (... and binary plugins from a different archetecture won't work...), just give them the 32 bit OS.
Not quite. If the source isn't included, there needs to be a written offer that *says* the source code is available. For GPLv2, that written offer must be for a mail order version of the source rather than a network delivered version.
Actually, that doesn't work. If it did, I would have suggested it.
Before you can install libdvdcss2 through apt on Ubuntu, you need to enable the custom mediabuntu repository. Enabling a custom repository through the GUI is so much blatantly more work than pasting a single terminal command, I just decided to show the easy way.
You're a Gentoo user. That means you're willing to go through quite a bit of effort to get things to work exactly the way you want them, and that if you break something you're willing to take full responsibility for fixing it. I can relate - I ran Gentoo for a year. Eventually I decided that even though I *can* fix pretty much any issue that comes up, that doesn't mean that I want to do that all the time. Even among Linux users, most people will never understand the system well enough to even do a Gentoo Stage1 install. And that's OK.
There exist people who aren't computer geeks. There are even computer geeks who aren't Linux experts. They should absolutely learn more about their computers, but forcing them to tinker with their system just to get flash to work right just so they can say "I'm running a 64 bit OS" isn't a good idea. If they want to make that decision in full knowledge of the deal they're making, great - but I'd much rather they saw a 32 bit distro where "normal", "simple" things like flash just worked.
If the reason for making them go through contortions to get flash was to point out that flash is evil propretary crap, that would at least be arguable - but the real world benefits of a 64 bit OS for normal desktop computing with under 3 gigs of RAM is effectively zero.
You can do lots of stuff. That's not the question.
The question is this: Does your non-technical friend who you're foisting Linux on want to figure out nspluginwrapper or how to run a 32-bit version of Firefox just to get flash working? Is it worth forcing them to deal with that stuff at all for no visible advantages?
That stuff's all true. Thing is - a non-technical user who's running non-CPU-bound tasks could care less. It's great that you, as a geek, know that stuff - but a little bit more efficient CPU usage is no reason to screw a non-technical user out of Flash.
I really wish that the performance gains were so blatantly obvious that even non-technical users would give up flash / win32codecs rather than use a 32-bit OS, but the fact of the matter is they can't tell the difference. So there's no reason to (from a non-technical) cripple a friend's computer for a purely-theoretical performance gain.
That's really neat, but it's not the least bit appropriate for non-technical users. Even for users who are capible of using it, it should be considered experimental - what it's doing is probably safe, but it's the first thing I'd blame weird package system / upgrade problems on if I were using it.
I run the 32 bit version of Firefox on 64-bit Ubuntu for flash myself, but there's no reason to force non-technical users to screw with that sort of thing. Non-technical users on computers with up to 3 gigs of RAM should get a 32 bit OS. Anything else is just making things hard for them for no good reason.
Yea. There is. Flash doesn't work out of the box, nor do 32 bit non-native video codecs.
Until you go over 3 gigs of RAM, all of the benifits of 64 bit Linux over 32 bit Linux are basically invisible and irrelevant for a normal desktop user. Sure, running a 64bit OS is cool - but your non-technical friend won't care one bit when they can't watch the multimedia they want hassle free.