Depends who you ask. According to that study: ".. another clear result: High school grades matter — a lot. For both those students who submitted their test results to their colleges and those who did not, high school grades were the best predictor of a student's success in college."
I wonder if this study has the College Board a little worried about their relevance. Does the SAT make them a little money?
No problem. Reading your link certainly makes it seem like the firefighters did do the right thing, and many commenters are missing that, so good post.
Actually it is loosely defined in the audioholics link as "potentially hours every day." I quickly Googled it and multiple legitimate sources said that an occasional 3D experience is not harmful.
Thank you for inspiring me to research a little more than I had. Like you, I parent cautiously, but 3D once in a while doesn't make a blip on my threat radar. Happy parenting!
"Conclusion:... Going to a 3D movie each month probably won’t hurt anyone’s vision..."
If you get hung up on "Children under seven are at risk of strabismus – period," then you may be missing the repeated use of the words "prolonged exposure" in the article and linked studies.
All things in moderation. That's my motto. Well, one of them anyway.
I was thinking that, too. As a stage performer I have to access empathy to make my character feel real *and* perform all of the split-second analysis that happens in live theater (improvising around technical challenges, line flubs, etc.) It is a balancing act. Perhaps it is just fast switching between the two?
"The nuclear industry... have never lied about conditions at their plants or the scope of an event."
Google "Vermont Yankee Lied Under Oath" for your own education. It is very hard to find an unbiased source, but this is the best I can find:
"The underground pipes were of the sort that plant officials had earlier told lawmakers and the Public Service Board — the later under oath — didn’t exist."
I think modern nuclear power is important, and I'm usually a nuclear proponent, but Entergy is hard to love.
I'm not defending the site, but when you say, "If you can't criticize others because you might hurt their feelings..." this popped to mind. We live in interesting times.
For my 7-year-old son, I got a "My First Lab Duo-Scope Microscope" from Amazon (same as a low-end one you can get from the hometrainingtools link above). This is a good little microscope, but I didn't break the bank on it. My prudent decision was worth it - he really enjoyed it but only for a while. We still keep it around and pop things into it from time to time, but it isn't his favorite thing (he likes Snap Circuits better). If I had spent a lot more money, it might have felt wasted. If he had loved it, upgrading would not have felt like a burden, and the Duo-Scope would still have been valuable as a field tool.
I probably should have gotten more prepared slides. Only came with a few, and I got a few more, but making your own takes time and effort. My kid is very patient for a 7-year-old, but he wasn't really into that part of it. Yours may be different, just sharing my own anecdote. For my kid, the activity almost doesn't matter as much as the fact that we just do science-y stuff together.
There are many GeekDesks at my office. We like a height adjustable desk for a lot of reasons but primarily because tall chairs are rarely available in the broad ergonomic array that normal office chairs are. With a height adjustable desk you can use all kinds of things under the desk: a squishy mat under foot to provide some comfort and exercise when standing, a balance board or little stair-stepper thing (also standing), an exercise ball (sitting), etc. Sometimes I just want my feet on the floor or to use a footstool in front of me when sitting. No one has rigged up a treadmill yet, but it is only a matter of time. Height-adjustable is far more versatile than fixed height!
Yes! This is the question I want to ask! When is the next album for families? (in ain't just kids - I love those tunes, too)
And where can I get an officially sanctioned copy of the adult version of "Robot Parade?"
You neglect so much while putting yourself in the exact same category of "willing to do violence for the sole sake of capitalism." Eye for an eye does not work long term (your favorite teacher, history), especially when the key harm is "you hurt my wallet.". History teaches repeatedly, "the best way to not get hurt is to not be where the hurt is."
Avoid them - use routes that cost money, not lives. Inconvenience them in less costly ways (both in terms of life and money) - break their boats, not their bones. Be creative with political solutions. Look forward to a better humanity, not backwards to our primitive beginnings, like we have done by reducing the death penalty.
But I see that you are inflexible by repeatedly presenting only one solution - you believe that making ANY change equals "giving them everything they want" and money outweighs the chief benefits of hard won civilization which is that we shouldn't need to kill each other to solve our differences, or to maintain profit margins.
Too simplistic and binary. There are choices other than "historically effective, but bloody solutions" and "historically ineffective solutions." History has shown us where we can be bloody and where we can be ineffective. Let's use history to help us find effective non-bloody solutions. Are you suggesting that bloody history is the *only* effective option available? Then just like your aversion to topics of slavery, I have an aversion to such simplistic absolutes. "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out" may be historically effective, but I reject the premise that it is the best or only solution available that works relative to a modern civilization - I have a huge problem with death as a solution to problems of capitalism (the core issue) as it sets a bad precedent.
I agree that there is no real or current justification for slavery, but you brought up "history" and "effective." Those pyramids are pretty effective historical monuments to what one can do with slavery - it may have been inefficient by any measure of capitalism, but it certainly was effective. History has all kinds of effective and bloody solutions employed by the Imperial powers of their day. There is a reason why "History repeating itself" is often considered a bad thing. Historically suggested solutions, especially bloody and "simple but effective ones," can easily ignore where civilization has made gains. If one does not care about history's lessons in this manner, or the gains apparent in modern civilization, one can easily justify slavery by simply moving the historical point of "effective" around.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if this study has the College Board a little worried about their relevance. Does the SAT make them a little money?
No problem. Reading your link certainly makes it seem like the firefighters did do the right thing, and many commenters are missing that, so good post.
That was a great read, thanks.
"The application of water seemed to intensify the fire activity...then applied dry chemical extinguisher.."
and later
"...had to puncture multiple holes into the pack to apply water to the burning material in the battery."
That seems like a questionable decision unless all they had left was water. Did I read the timeline wrong?
http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/09/how-to-read-a-patent-in-60-second/ Referenced in the Spolsky post.
My favorite is this one: http://www.geteyesmart.org/eyesmart/living/3-d-movies-glasses.cfm
Here's another: http://www.allaboutvision.com/parents/children-computer-vision-syndrome.htm#3dnews
And another: http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2011/05/26/study-parents-think-3d-hurts-kids-eyes.html
Thank you for inspiring me to research a little more than I had. Like you, I parent cautiously, but 3D once in a while doesn't make a blip on my threat radar. Happy parenting!
http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/warning-3d-video-hazardous-to-your-health
"Conclusion: ... Going to a 3D movie each month probably won’t hurt anyone’s vision..."
If you get hung up on "Children under seven are at risk of strabismus – period," then you may be missing the repeated use of the words "prolonged exposure" in the article and linked studies.
All things in moderation. That's my motto. Well, one of them anyway.
If this thing takes out Santa, my kid's gonna be pissed!
No. OSS = nirvana.
I was thinking that, too. As a stage performer I have to access empathy to make my character feel real *and* perform all of the split-second analysis that happens in live theater (improvising around technical challenges, line flubs, etc.) It is a balancing act. Perhaps it is just fast switching between the two?
Which, ironically, has the side benefit of protecting his life.
"The nuclear industry... have never lied about conditions at their plants or the scope of an event."
Google "Vermont Yankee Lied Under Oath" for your own education. It is very hard to find an unbiased source, but this is the best I can find:
"The underground pipes were of the sort that plant officials had earlier told lawmakers and the Public Service Board — the later under oath — didn’t exist."
I think modern nuclear power is important, and I'm usually a nuclear proponent, but Entergy is hard to love.
I'm not defending the site, but when you say, "If you can't criticize others because you might hurt their feelings..." this popped to mind. We live in interesting times.
For my 7-year-old son, I got a "My First Lab Duo-Scope Microscope" from Amazon (same as a low-end one you can get from the hometrainingtools link above). This is a good little microscope, but I didn't break the bank on it. My prudent decision was worth it - he really enjoyed it but only for a while. We still keep it around and pop things into it from time to time, but it isn't his favorite thing (he likes Snap Circuits better). If I had spent a lot more money, it might have felt wasted. If he had loved it, upgrading would not have felt like a burden, and the Duo-Scope would still have been valuable as a field tool. I probably should have gotten more prepared slides. Only came with a few, and I got a few more, but making your own takes time and effort. My kid is very patient for a 7-year-old, but he wasn't really into that part of it. Yours may be different, just sharing my own anecdote. For my kid, the activity almost doesn't matter as much as the fact that we just do science-y stuff together.
There are many GeekDesks at my office. We like a height adjustable desk for a lot of reasons but primarily because tall chairs are rarely available in the broad ergonomic array that normal office chairs are. With a height adjustable desk you can use all kinds of things under the desk: a squishy mat under foot to provide some comfort and exercise when standing, a balance board or little stair-stepper thing (also standing), an exercise ball (sitting), etc. Sometimes I just want my feet on the floor or to use a footstool in front of me when sitting. No one has rigged up a treadmill yet, but it is only a matter of time. Height-adjustable is far more versatile than fixed height!
The play Photograph 51 told me that story. Brilliant play. Try to see it if you can.
Oh for mod points. Nicely said.
And that's why you're flying now. Oops! Sorry I mentioned it!
It appears from this story that some of the actual workers don't agree with you.
Yes! This is the question I want to ask! When is the next album for families? (in ain't just kids - I love those tunes, too) And where can I get an officially sanctioned copy of the adult version of "Robot Parade?"
Trash bags!
Did you mean: Correlation != Caucasian ?
You neglect so much while putting yourself in the exact same category of "willing to do violence for the sole sake of capitalism." Eye for an eye does not work long term (your favorite teacher, history), especially when the key harm is "you hurt my wallet.". History teaches repeatedly, "the best way to not get hurt is to not be where the hurt is." Avoid them - use routes that cost money, not lives. Inconvenience them in less costly ways (both in terms of life and money) - break their boats, not their bones. Be creative with political solutions. Look forward to a better humanity, not backwards to our primitive beginnings, like we have done by reducing the death penalty. But I see that you are inflexible by repeatedly presenting only one solution - you believe that making ANY change equals "giving them everything they want" and money outweighs the chief benefits of hard won civilization which is that we shouldn't need to kill each other to solve our differences, or to maintain profit margins.
Too simplistic and binary. There are choices other than "historically effective, but bloody solutions" and "historically ineffective solutions." History has shown us where we can be bloody and where we can be ineffective. Let's use history to help us find effective non-bloody solutions. Are you suggesting that bloody history is the *only* effective option available? Then just like your aversion to topics of slavery, I have an aversion to such simplistic absolutes. "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out" may be historically effective, but I reject the premise that it is the best or only solution available that works relative to a modern civilization - I have a huge problem with death as a solution to problems of capitalism (the core issue) as it sets a bad precedent.
I agree that there is no real or current justification for slavery, but you brought up "history" and "effective." Those pyramids are pretty effective historical monuments to what one can do with slavery - it may have been inefficient by any measure of capitalism, but it certainly was effective. History has all kinds of effective and bloody solutions employed by the Imperial powers of their day. There is a reason why "History repeating itself" is often considered a bad thing. Historically suggested solutions, especially bloody and "simple but effective ones," can easily ignore where civilization has made gains. If one does not care about history's lessons in this manner, or the gains apparent in modern civilization, one can easily justify slavery by simply moving the historical point of "effective" around.