Shutting off access to the internet in classrooms is only a temporary solutions. Sooner or later there will be technology that gives laptop users internet connections that will be hard to limit. WiMax for the whole campus for example.
As an college instructor, I believe the real challenge for educators is engaging in a classroom setting a generation of students that are used to multitasking. Certainly one student distracting others will be part of that challenge. Turning off access to the internet only postpones addressing this challenge. I certainly don't have well formulated solutions to these teaching challenges. However, the experience of my students using computers in my classroom forces me to think about these issues and helps me to develop new strategies for teaching.
War on drugs, war on terror, war in Iraq, war in Afgahistan. Heck, we're still at war with North Korea. Is there any time in the near future that could not be classified as "during wartime" for the US?
but after that it gets harder. I'd say you'd need to use the chain rule for linux. At first it seems a little strange, before it all makes sense, but then once it does, it's really useful.
To differentiate Windows, I think that you'd probaby have to use the quotient rule. It seems pretty straightforward, but it never feels exactly right.
Actually, I'd like to make it even easier my students. After the iTalk comes out in April, I plan on recording all my class lectures and putting them up on the course website. I already publish my class notes on the web. I figure putting the audio of lectures on the web adds value to the course.
If this means some students don't come to class, so be it. They're big boys and girls, and can make decisions for themselves. I figure that doing this makes it even more clear the the value in comming to my lectures is that you can ask me questions.
When I recently bought a Powerbook from my University's Computer Store, the sales person probably told me about three times, that since I was customizing the computer I couldn't return it. This was fine with me, since I knew what I wanted, but it was good of him to be that explicit about the return policy.
I haven't bought a computer from Apple's website, so I don't know how clear they are about the return policy. Whether or not you thin this is a good policy or not, this is an example of "caveat emptor". If your dropping big buck on a piece of hardware, you should probably read all that fine print.
It's not a great policy to have the default be no returns. It would be a more consumer friendly to reserve the right not to accept a return. Maybe this is how it's worded.
I was thinking about this issue for a while yesterday. I'm teach math at a state university, and have a hard time justifying the cost of calculus texbooks. Other math subjects, with a signifcantly smaller market, I don't really mind the cost of books so much. Those book aren't the ones with a new edition every year anyways.
I've seen the idea of "open source" textbooks mentioned here before. I've always though that a calculus book would be an optimal test bed for the open and collaboratively written textbooks. Calculus has not changed in a long time, and it's not going to. Also, lots of college students have to take calculus. There a number of people who understand the subject thoroughly enough to write about it.
Writting the book would be a lot of work. Publishing is also a large dilemma. Certainly printing the pages and binding them is more difficult that compiling code. Many large universities have their own presses, which is a start. You could distribute a PDF of the book for free. I'm sure enterprising copy shops around campus could print and bind it for a fee much smaller than what current publishers charge. I have some other idea for publishing as well.
There are other difficulties to be addressed. One is academic advancement, and how work on this project would affect it. Others are logistical, but there are other collaborative process to look to answers for. I'd be interested in what people thought about the merits of this idea. Certainly I'd be interested in discussing this idea further.
I'll say it again. Apple is a premium hardware company, like BMW or Mercedes in the auto industry. All do a good job of marketing and selling a premium product. If Apple's marketshare of portable music players falls, which it will, that's fine because they know how to operate with low market share.
Sure BMW could sell more cars if they dropped their price, but that's not their business model. Market share is not Apple's core business model. The are many comments in this thread that would sound odd if you replace Apple with BMW, because we all accept that BMW sells a premium product. You should accept the same with Apple. Note here that premium does not mean high end or better. It just means premium, something consumers are willing to pay more for.
Yes. The iPods minis are overpriced, and they have their limitations. It would be foolish to argue otherwise. However BMW stills sells cars, and apple will sell iPod minis. Is it a catagory killer, like Jobs suggested in his Keynote? No. Are they horrible products? No. They will sell and make Apple money.
What is the the legality of buying a CD, importing it into say, itunes, and then selling it as used?
I know you could replace "selling it as used" with "returning it", but that's not something I'd do. However I do have a large collection of CD I never listen to, because I have them on my iPod. Is there anything wrong will selling my collection?
I think 5 cents an article might be a bit too steep, but that might be because I read more than a few articles a day. Why don't some web content providers band toghter to administer a subscription service. 7 bucks a month for slashdot, Nytimes, ESPN, and something else could entice me to pay. Or how about article posted in the last 24 hours for subscribers, and day olds to the masses?
Re:I just don't get it.
on
The Star Wars Car
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's art, which means not everyone is supposed to get it. Everyone needs an outlet for creativitiy, clearly this guy has found his. I feel that design is in a resurgence, which means that more and more people have access to art in everyday life. For example, the ipod. Art shouldn't be relagated to museums, and when it's not, life is more interesting.
It's unlikely that the iPod will maintain large marketshare for MP3 players. It costs too much, but then Apple is a harware company that sells premium products. The iPods will likely maintain their postion as preminum product. So even if thier market share falls to 3% of the MP3 player markets, Apple know how to deal with that
What they did is they created a market for their hardware, which pretty much makes them a winner. Sure they won't maintain marketshare, but in the meantime make money while the money making is good.
Citizen Kane did suck. Anyways there are more than just the critics that are going against this movie. There is the tendancy for sequels to be worse than the previous movie. With that said, I'm be shocked if this movie is worth the $7.50+.
Or how about those people that ride a bicycle to work. I've gotten real good at identify those drivers that are oblivious enough to kill me. Roads are are fro transportation, not neccisarily cars.
Something Gibson suggests in his piece is an idea of informational tranparency. The idea that eventually, people will be access any information they seek. I've always though that eventually we'll have privicy through omniscience, not obscurity. When all information is easily available, few people will actually care about your information.
Slashdot Mirror
The Fischer Griess Monster. It's really big, and it's existence has been verified.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster_group
Shutting off access to the internet in classrooms is only a temporary solutions. Sooner or later there will be technology that gives laptop users internet connections that will be hard to limit. WiMax for the whole campus for example.
As an college instructor, I believe the real challenge for educators is engaging in a classroom setting a generation of students that are used to multitasking. Certainly one student distracting others will be part of that challenge. Turning off access to the internet only postpones addressing this challenge. I certainly don't have well formulated solutions to these teaching challenges. However, the experience of my students using computers in my classroom forces me to think about these issues and helps me to develop new strategies for teaching.
War on drugs, war on terror, war in Iraq, war in Afgahistan. Heck, we're still at war with North Korea. Is there any time in the near future that could not be classified as "during wartime" for the US?
Well first you'd need to use the sum rule, since
d/dx(Windows + Linux)=d/dx (Windows) + d/dx (Linux)
but after that it gets harder. I'd say you'd need to use the chain rule for linux. At first it seems a little strange, before it all makes sense, but then once it does, it's really useful.
To differentiate Windows, I think that you'd probaby have to use the quotient rule. It seems pretty straightforward, but it never feels exactly right.
Actually, I'd like to make it even easier my students. After the iTalk comes out in April, I plan on recording all my class lectures and putting them up on the course website. I already publish my class notes on the web. I figure putting the audio of lectures on the web adds value to the course.
If this means some students don't come to class, so be it. They're big boys and girls, and can make decisions for themselves. I figure that doing this makes it even more clear the the value in comming to my lectures is that you can ask me questions.
When I recently bought a Powerbook from my University's Computer Store, the sales person probably told me about three times, that since I was customizing the computer I couldn't return it. This was fine with me, since I knew what I wanted, but it was good of him to be that explicit about the return policy.
I haven't bought a computer from Apple's website, so I don't know how clear they are about the return policy. Whether or not you thin this is a good policy or not, this is an example of "caveat emptor". If your dropping big buck on a piece of hardware, you should probably read all that fine print.
It's not a great policy to have the default be no returns. It would be a more consumer friendly to reserve the right not to accept a return. Maybe this is how it's worded.
I was thinking about this issue for a while yesterday. I'm teach math at a state university, and have a hard time justifying the cost of calculus texbooks. Other math subjects, with a signifcantly smaller market, I don't really mind the cost of books so much. Those book aren't the ones with a new edition every year anyways.
I've seen the idea of "open source" textbooks mentioned here before. I've always though that a calculus book would be an optimal test bed for the open and collaboratively written textbooks. Calculus has not changed in a long time, and it's not going to. Also, lots of college students have to take calculus. There a number of people who understand the subject thoroughly enough to write about it.
Writting the book would be a lot of work. Publishing is also a large dilemma. Certainly printing the pages and binding them is more difficult that compiling code. Many large universities have their own presses, which is a start. You could distribute a PDF of the book for free. I'm sure enterprising copy shops around campus could print and bind it for a fee much smaller than what current publishers charge. I have some other idea for publishing as well.
There are other difficulties to be addressed. One is academic advancement, and how work on this project would affect it. Others are logistical, but there are other collaborative process to look to answers for. I'd be interested in what people thought about the merits of this idea. Certainly I'd be interested in discussing this idea further.
I'll say it again. Apple is a premium hardware company, like BMW or Mercedes in the auto industry. All do a good job of marketing and selling a premium product. If Apple's marketshare of portable music players falls, which it will, that's fine because they know how to operate with low market share.
Sure BMW could sell more cars if they dropped their price, but that's not their business model. Market share is not Apple's core business model. The are many comments in this thread that would sound odd if you replace Apple with BMW, because we all accept that BMW sells a premium product. You should accept the same with Apple. Note here that premium does not mean high end or better. It just means premium, something consumers are willing to pay more for.
Yes. The iPods minis are overpriced, and they have their limitations. It would be foolish to argue otherwise. However BMW stills sells cars, and apple will sell iPod minis. Is it a catagory killer, like Jobs suggested in his Keynote? No. Are they horrible products? No. They will sell and make Apple money.
Allow me to pose a related quesiton:
What is the the legality of buying a CD, importing it into say, itunes, and then selling it as used?
I know you could replace "selling it as used" with "returning it", but that's not something I'd do. However I do have a large collection of CD I never listen to, because I have them on my iPod. Is there anything wrong will selling my collection?
welcome our new Repubican overlords.
Err, maybe this is a few years late.
I think 5 cents an article might be a bit too steep, but that might be because I read more than a few articles a day. Why don't some web content providers band toghter to administer a subscription service. 7 bucks a month for slashdot, Nytimes, ESPN, and something else could entice me to pay. Or how about article posted in the last 24 hours for subscribers, and day olds to the masses?
It's art, which means not everyone is supposed to get it. Everyone needs an outlet for creativitiy, clearly this guy has found his. I feel that design is in a resurgence, which means that more and more people have access to art in everyday life. For example, the ipod. Art shouldn't be relagated to museums, and when it's not, life is more interesting.
It's unlikely that the iPod will maintain large marketshare for MP3 players. It costs too much, but then Apple is a harware company that sells premium products. The iPods will likely maintain their postion as preminum product. So even if thier market share falls to 3% of the MP3 player markets, Apple know how to deal with that
What they did is they created a market for their hardware, which pretty much makes them a winner. Sure they won't maintain marketshare, but in the meantime make money while the money making is good.
That or macular degeneration...
Citizen Kane did suck. Anyways there are more than just the critics that are going against this movie. There is the tendancy for sequels to be worse than the previous movie. With that said, I'm be shocked if this movie is worth the $7.50+.
Or how about those people that ride a bicycle to work. I've gotten real good at identify those drivers that are oblivious enough to kill me. Roads are are fro transportation, not neccisarily cars.
Check out William Gibson's Op/Ed in the New York time. Basically, he revises Orwell's vision for today.
www.nytimes.com/2003/06/25/opinion/25GIBS.html
Any one manage to cheeck out William Gibson's op/ed in the New York Times? An excellent read.
S .h tml
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/25/opinion/25GIB
Something Gibson suggests in his piece is an idea of informational tranparency. The idea that eventually, people will be access any information they seek. I've always though that eventually we'll have privicy through omniscience, not obscurity. When all information is easily available, few people will actually care about your information.