Well, they were a little bit off in their prediction of the ubiquity of fax machines and stuff - nobody thought computers, email and wireless devices would be quite what they are now.
I guess they need 11 more years to finish up the flying cars and Mr. Fusion retrofit kits... they can keep the double neckties and other fashion faux pases (like the sunglasses - ugh!)
I did RTFA, and my point is that there's nothing behind his assertions that Apple is losing market share in education. Aside from a whiny "long live Apple" slant, the article really doesn't say much.
I guess my criticism was more of the lack of any basis in real data as opposed to a vague reference to "market researcher Quality Education Data" and a few anecdotal comments by people in the educational field.
Show me some data to back it up, along with taking other facts into account, like the fact that there are probably more computers in schools now than there ever have been before - and I'll be satisfied with the article.
A decade ago, most workplaces were a mess of different models, few of which could work together, let alone speak to one another.
Which workplaces is he talking about? Even 10 years ago, I don't think things were THAT bad...
I hate to make the usual Apple enthusiast party-line complaint about the article, but it just seems like a whole lot of assumptions and FUD based on no real facts. Even the comments about the Maine program fail to mention the general budgetary hard times that have fallen on the states (who have to choose between cutting educational computer programs or healthcare, or raising taxes).
Is there anything to this other than more "Apple's about to go under!" talk that we've been hearing since 1984?
Allowing larger electricity flows through substations without fear of overpowering the circuit breakers would let power companies move more energy through the grid, Mr. Pellegrino said.
That is a major goal of the government and private companies, because new power lines are hard to build.
Well DUH...
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...
on
Aquarium Modcase
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I suppose all of that Fluorinert probably wouldn't be too good for the fishies, though.
Hypothetically, could oxygen even be dissolved in Fluorinert? (I'm thinking not as it's probably a nonpolar fluid, but whatever)...
Forum Shopping / "Federal Question" Jursidiction
on
RIAA Quashed
·
· Score: 1
By not going thru washington, and going thru a local court, its not as easy to get the U.S. Citizen vs. citizen of the united states of america argument. its still possible, but harder. if it comes from washington, and you claim your citizenship (IE citizen of the united states of america not US Citizen) then washington cant do a damn thing to you.
I don't follow your argument at all, but I'll try and address the issue I think you're talking about...
Federal courts exist under the jurisdiction granted them by Congress. One of these areas is "federal question" jurisdiction. It's what lets you bring some claims immediately in federal court instead of finding some other reason (e.g. diversity of citizenship between states).
One of the biggest issues of bringing suit in federal court is the problem of "forum-shopping." It's patently unfair (no pun intended) that if you bring suit in one court versus another, you might get a better result. This leads to a whole other host of Erie problems involving the application of state law in federal courts, which is another discussion for another time.
To clarify: you don't have to go "through Washington" to sue in federal court; it's an issue of the jurisdiction created for the courts by Congress in the area of patent/copyright claims.
There used to be a much better Perl-based test out there based on the book, Please Understand Me by David Kiersey and Marilyn Bates, but I found this test out there. (You can go to Kiersey's self-promotional site too, but it looks like they use some form of communist registration/info-gathering technique before they let you take the test.)
Introversion/Extraversion is simply one of many factors - in this organizational scheme, Jungian personality types adapted by Isabel Briggs Myers.
We also had the HP 48G in high school, and I have to say that even to this day I stutter wuth four-function calculators because, instinctively, I try RPN.
Even when we started using the HPs in class in 1994-ish, the NYS Regents (and, I believe, the AP test people) had disseminated some information that proctors should be aware of calculators with IR capability and cover the ports with electrical tape.
Mickey often has a comment after a ride. For example, he asks you to make sure he didn't lose an ear to Emperor Zurg's laser after you ride Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin.
I wonder... if you take Mickey with you on a roller coaster that he's not tall enough to ride, will he remind you to check himself at the door?
And more philosophically, if he goes on such a ride and falls out (into theme park no-mans land, where "no items are retrieved until the end of the day") will he ask you to make sure he's still there... even if he isn't there to ask?
I agree, though - part of why I always loved Doctor Who (and panned Star Trek) when I was growing up is because there were not only complicated plot situations, but also characters that were complicated and not transparent like so many in "good effects" shows stateside.
There were lots of other things that made it fun, too - Leela would generally have a "fierce savage" moment, K-9 would use his ray too much and lose power, The Doctor would involve his hat and scarf in a ploy to fool the Daleks and save a planet, etc.
Speaking of Daleks, imagine how much cheaper it was to film in a universe without stairs!;)
BBC Special Effects budget in 1978 = $2 US
on
Blakes Seven To Return
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
$1.67 - Doctor Who $0.33 - Blake's 7
I remember watching both shows (and growing up on Tom Baker when Dr. Who was broadcast on the local PBS station in the early 1980s) and remembering, as a four year-old, "that doesn't even look like a real spaceship" (in reference to Blake's 7).
While CG special effects have gotten better and cheaper over the years, one wonders if they're going to try and overcompensate for past gaffes by over-SFXing the new show. If it ever ets off the ground.
The really tough part is that they might have to, because the first thing that many think of when you play word association with Blake's 7 is "whoa, the effects."
In Charleston, W.Va., college student Amy Boggs said
she quickly deleted more than 1,400 music files on her computer after the AP told her she was the target of a subpoena. Boggs said she sometimes downloaded dozens of songs on any given day, including ones by Fleetwood Mac, Blondie, Incubus and Busta Rhymes.
I'd be curious to see if in cases like this, where the RIAA has already ultimately achieved its objective of shutting down "average" file sharers, they'd go a step further to scare others and pile on charges for spoliation of evidence and contempt of court (perhaps through failure to comply with a subpoena duces tecum by destroying the items sought).
Any thoughts? I mean, it sounds extreme. Clearly they won't go THAT far overboard... *shudder*
The systems, in which voters are given computer-chip-bearing smart cards to operate the machines, could be tricked by anyone with $100 worth of computer equipment, said Adam Stubblefield, a co-author of the paper.
"With what we found, practically anyone in the country -- from a teenager on up -- could produce these smart cards that could allow someone to vote as many times as they like," Mr. Stubblefield said.
It would be interesting to see how worried Diebold is about fraudulent misrepresentation in its voting machines as opposed to its ATMs. I wonder aloud how vigilant they are (read: how much money they spend in a year) in each area.
Just from the above quote, this doesn't sound like the kind of security that any bank would tolerate. Is this a case of lawmakers awarding contracts under duress after being wowed by cool "tecknoligee" in order to avoid being the next "Florida 2000," or is Diebold simply a victim of its own success for having potentially higher standards for commerce than voting?
[sarcasm] It almost seems like the authentication process to make this work would need something as stringent as, say, a National ID card...
Ooh, and we could use a Poll tax to pay for the equipment! [/sarcasm]
One of the criticisms of the guidelines has been that they offer little flexibility for federal judges when doling out criminal punishment. That's why organizations like this exist. Reform of the laws must be done through Congress - so if you don't like them, write your Senator/Senatrix and Congressperson...
Similar criticisms have been made of the sentencing guidelines with respect to fraud and abuse cases in healthcare, where the scienter bar can often be very low.
While I have no basis to make this broad generalization, I'd imagine that it's no different at RPI than anywhere else.
They were still phasing in the 4x4 curriculum and Total Laptop Domination while I was there, so my experience was probably somewhat different... but if it wasn't laptops, it was (gasp!) reading something other than the text or notes during class, or (GASP!) writing messages on paper to the person next to you. And this was WAY back in 1999!;)
In some ways, the latter was even more instant than this so-called "Instant" Messaging technology, because you could snicker as soon as the person was half-done writing their snide or humorous comment to the point that the punch line was understandable.
Another benefit is the longevity of such comments - I have many notes between myself and the guy who sat next to me in class in my Human Physiology I notebook (the paper kind) that still refresh my memory of specific lectures. Class was made memorable by the daily choice of attire by the professor (they didn't call her "Jane, the Lion Tamer" for nothing) and subsequent note-taking on non-physiological topics.
I'm in a different kind of school now, and find that the frequency of laptop use/abuse in class is inversely proportional to the communication ability of the lecturer. There are some classes that I assume that I need to take a few notes and otherwise sit there, learning by osmosis. The rationale that everyone uses isn't one of "keeping back channels open to discuss classwork," but "staying awake and surviving through this class so we look alive and don't get called on." It is something of a survivalist response, but there have been times where the majority of the class has been in an AIM chatroom, and the victim of a random-assed question directed at one student by the prof has been assisted by classmates via AIM. This helps the student in saving face, but is it really helping learning?
The most disturbing comments I heard were from a student who visited another school and noticed that a few students were watching DVDs on their laptops during class. When she asked the prof about it, the response was a flippant "hey, at least they're coming to class."
There are certain classes in which I don't dare plug into the ethernet jack - not out of fear of the prof, but because I might be distracted and miss a good point by the lecturer or another student. I actually enjoy this environment more, since I don't feel the need to distract myself to stay awake.
I do feel somewhat guilty paying $234827539438579348573945834.56 a year (+/-) in tuition just to chat in class, even if some of the profs are begging to be talked about with classmates in real time to catch the humor of their phrases and mannerisms. I'm going up to my eyeballs in debt to learn; I an chat on AIM (iChat, really) anytime I want to - for free.
Perhaps it will force the issue of recognizing talented, engaging lecturers versus those who read off whatever's on the podium. Maybe schools should start using "percentage of time I was chatting on AIM during class" as a new criterion in faculty course evaluations...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they were a little bit off in their prediction of the ubiquity of fax machines and stuff - nobody thought computers, email and wireless devices would be quite what they are now.
I guess they need 11 more years to finish up the flying cars and Mr. Fusion retrofit kits... they can keep the double neckties and other fashion faux pases (like the sunglasses - ugh!)
And who can forget the immortal words of Iko 'Jitz' Fujitsu: "Read my fax!"
Well, at least they didn't get it ALL wrong in Back to the Future II... the message was just delivered on cell phones instead of paper.
Where's my pizza rehydrator and hoverboard, anyway?
SCOTTY: Computer....Computer? (Technician hands SCOTTY the mouse. SCOTTY uses it as a microphone) Hello, computer.
TECHNICIAN: Just use the keyboard!
SCOTTY: The keyboard? How quaint!
I did RTFA, and my point is that there's nothing behind his assertions that Apple is losing market share in education. Aside from a whiny "long live Apple" slant, the article really doesn't say much.
I guess my criticism was more of the lack of any basis in real data as opposed to a vague reference to "market researcher Quality Education Data" and a few anecdotal comments by people in the educational field.
Show me some data to back it up, along with taking other facts into account, like the fact that there are probably more computers in schools now than there ever have been before - and I'll be satisfied with the article.
My big question right now is: so what?
I hate to make the usual Apple enthusiast party-line complaint about the article, but it just seems like a whole lot of assumptions and FUD based on no real facts. Even the comments about the Maine program fail to mention the general budgetary hard times that have fallen on the states (who have to choose between cutting educational computer programs or healthcare, or raising taxes).
Is there anything to this other than more "Apple's about to go under!" talk that we've been hearing since 1984?
...would that be a school of fish?
What if you combined this with another project?
I suppose all of that Fluorinert probably wouldn't be too good for the fishies, though.
Hypothetically, could oxygen even be dissolved in Fluorinert? (I'm thinking not as it's probably a nonpolar fluid, but whatever)...
Federal courts exist under the jurisdiction granted them by Congress. One of these areas is "federal question" jurisdiction. It's what lets you bring some claims immediately in federal court instead of finding some other reason (e.g. diversity of citizenship between states).
One of the biggest issues of bringing suit in federal court is the problem of "forum-shopping." It's patently unfair (no pun intended) that if you bring suit in one court versus another, you might get a better result. This leads to a whole other host of Erie problems involving the application of state law in federal courts, which is another discussion for another time.
To clarify: you don't have to go "through Washington" to sue in federal court; it's an issue of the jurisdiction created for the courts by Congress in the area of patent/copyright claims.
There used to be a much better Perl-based test out there based on the book, Please Understand Me by David Kiersey and Marilyn Bates, but I found this test out there. (You can go to Kiersey's self-promotional site too, but it looks like they use some form of communist registration/info-gathering technique before they let you take the test.)
Introversion/Extraversion is simply one of many factors - in this organizational scheme, Jungian personality types adapted by Isabel Briggs Myers.
We also had the HP 48G in high school, and I have to say that even to this day I stutter wuth four-function calculators because, instinctively, I try RPN.
Regardless, I think it could be a legitimate concern for test proctors - I never got it to work, but remember talk of a program that would allow your HP to act as a television remote control.
Even when we started using the HPs in class in 1994-ish, the NYS Regents (and, I believe, the AP test people) had disseminated some information that proctors should be aware of calculators with IR capability and cover the ports with electrical tape.
And more philosophically, if he goes on such a ride and falls out (into theme park no-mans land, where "no items are retrieved until the end of the day") will he ask you to make sure he's still there... even if he isn't there to ask?
Woah.
I agree, though - part of why I always loved Doctor Who (and panned Star Trek) when I was growing up is because there were not only complicated plot situations, but also characters that were complicated and not transparent like so many in "good effects" shows stateside.
There were lots of other things that made it fun, too - Leela would generally have a "fierce savage" moment, K-9 would use his ray too much and lose power, The Doctor would involve his hat and scarf in a ploy to fool the Daleks and save a planet, etc.
Speaking of Daleks, imagine how much cheaper it was to film in a universe without stairs!
$1.67 - Doctor Who
$0.33 - Blake's 7
I remember watching both shows (and growing up on Tom Baker when Dr. Who was broadcast on the local PBS station in the early 1980s) and remembering, as a four year-old, "that doesn't even look like a real spaceship" (in reference to Blake's 7).
While CG special effects have gotten better and cheaper over the years, one wonders if they're going to try and overcompensate for past gaffes by over-SFXing the new show. If it ever ets off the ground.
The really tough part is that they might have to, because the first thing that many think of when you play word association with Blake's 7 is "whoa, the effects."
Any thoughts? I mean, it sounds extreme. Clearly they won't go THAT far overboard... *shudder*
Enron, anyone?
Just from the above quote, this doesn't sound like the kind of security that any bank would tolerate. Is this a case of lawmakers awarding contracts under duress after being wowed by cool "tecknoligee" in order to avoid being the next "Florida 2000," or is Diebold simply a victim of its own success for having potentially higher standards for commerce than voting?
[sarcasm]
It almost seems like the authentication process to make this work would need something as stringent as, say, a National ID card...
Ooh, and we could use a Poll tax to pay for the equipment!
[/sarcasm]
IIRC, these guidelines are set by Congress with input from the United States Sentencing Commission. More info about them here [PDF].
One of the criticisms of the guidelines has been that they offer little flexibility for federal judges when doling out criminal punishment. That's why organizations like this exist. Reform of the laws must be done through Congress - so if you don't like them, write your Senator/Senatrix and Congressperson...
Similar criticisms have been made of the sentencing guidelines with respect to fraud and abuse cases in healthcare, where the scienter bar can often be very low.
While I have no basis to make this broad generalization, I'd imagine that it's no different at RPI than anywhere else.
;)
They were still phasing in the 4x4 curriculum and Total Laptop Domination while I was there, so my experience was probably somewhat different... but if it wasn't laptops, it was (gasp!) reading something other than the text or notes during class, or (GASP!) writing messages on paper to the person next to you. And this was WAY back in 1999!
In some ways, the latter was even more instant than this so-called "Instant" Messaging technology, because you could snicker as soon as the person was half-done writing their snide or humorous comment to the point that the punch line was understandable.
Another benefit is the longevity of such comments - I have many notes between myself and the guy who sat next to me in class in my Human Physiology I notebook (the paper kind) that still refresh my memory of specific lectures. Class was made memorable by the daily choice of attire by the professor (they didn't call her "Jane, the Lion Tamer" for nothing) and subsequent note-taking on non-physiological topics.
I'm in a different kind of school now, and find that the frequency of laptop use/abuse in class is inversely proportional to the communication ability of the lecturer. There are some classes that I assume that I need to take a few notes and otherwise sit there, learning by osmosis. The rationale that everyone uses isn't one of "keeping back channels open to discuss classwork," but "staying awake and surviving through this class so we look alive and don't get called on." It is something of a survivalist response, but there have been times where the majority of the class has been in an AIM chatroom, and the victim of a random-assed question directed at one student by the prof has been assisted by classmates via AIM. This helps the student in saving face, but is it really helping learning?
The most disturbing comments I heard were from a student who visited another school and noticed that a few students were watching DVDs on their laptops during class. When she asked the prof about it, the response was a flippant "hey, at least they're coming to class."
There are certain classes in which I don't dare plug into the ethernet jack - not out of fear of the prof, but because I might be distracted and miss a good point by the lecturer or another student. I actually enjoy this environment more, since I don't feel the need to distract myself to stay awake.
I do feel somewhat guilty paying $234827539438579348573945834.56 a year (+/-) in tuition just to chat in class, even if some of the profs are begging to be talked about with classmates in real time to catch the humor of their phrases and mannerisms. I'm going up to my eyeballs in debt to learn; I an chat on AIM (iChat, really) anytime I want to - for free.
Perhaps it will force the issue of recognizing talented, engaging lecturers versus those who read off whatever's on the podium. Maybe schools should start using "percentage of time I was chatting on AIM during class" as a new criterion in faculty course evaluations...