So, I pulled up slashdot for some dinner reading in my hotel room... got out some good chips and chunky salsa... then I read this story. I hate wasting salsa, but I just can't eat it now. I wonder if it is young salsa...
Hmm... I was focused more on the idea of not teaching it in high school. I can see your point. My counterargument is that a Bachelor's of Arts/Science should connote some base level of proficiency in all basic fields, as well as deeper study in the area of concentration. I concede that my viewpoint is not universally accepted, though.
I completely agree -- in fact, I currently teach a calculus-based Physics course. I was trying to get the author the benefit of the doubt -- I understand that other institutions offer algebra-based Physics for pre-med students and the like. It is simply comical to think of doing any real science without algebra.
If we stop teaching algebra to all students at the high school or early college level, we are closing certain doors to them. You simply cannot master an entry-level, algebra-based Physics course without geometry and a lot of algebra work. If you can't do that, you cannot major in physics, most engineering subjects, nor math itself. I think economics would be a stretch as well.
If students (or parents) can choose to not take algebra at the 9th grade level, they are making a de facto decision that they will not study nor work in a STEM field later in life. Age 13 is awfully early to make that choice. They have not even attempted the challenge yet -- they do not know their abilities.
Even if they do continue in their studies and gain admittance to college, it will almost be a moot point. Their opportunities will have long since been limited.
When I moved recently, I decided to make the jump to an HTPC setup. Therefore, I was suddenly in the market for 3-4 Xbox 360's to act at Media Center extenders.
The going rate for a used Xbox at a retail store was around $179 at the time. However, searching in my local area on Craigslist, there were plenty listed in the $70 range, and I was able to negotiate down to an average price of $40 per Xbox 360.
Unless the Xbox 360 were a gift, you could save a ton of money going this route. I was even able to make sellers show me the Xbox plugged in, working, and able to login to Xbox live.
I did observe that most of the folks that were selling their Xbox 360's for pennies on the dollar were folks that probably shouldn't have bought them in the first place. In at least one case, I didn't drive nearly as hard of a bargain as I could have.
I think you are right about the ISDN part, I'll have to look at that when I get back... unfortunately, starting tomorrow, I'll be looking for access in another, less hospitable place...
but anyway, try this link for the email name question - link. I got it out of an english-translation for the setup instructions. It will as for your t-online password (a 8 or 10 digit number IIRC), then you should prompted for a user name (all in german of course). Hit "Andern" to accept. (Hadn't tried it myself, I just use yahoo.)
One more comment, for linux users: You will need to know how to get linux working with the PPP protocol to get "T-DSL" up and running. One good website I've seen is this one. Not sure which distributions work with it off the bat, but I know it wasn't too easy for me. The telekom provided directions for getting it to work, but in German unfortunately, and I cannot translate German and linux at the same time yet!
The Deutsche Telekom sells flat-rate "T-DSL" for about 55 euros a month. The service is extremely reliable as compared to what I was used to in the states. However, it is a bit of pain to get the parts (three separate boxes) and get it turned on. Get some help from a German-speaking friend or soldier. (as a side bonus, with the flat DSL, you can call the US for 4 cents a minute)
They also sell time-based access cards on post, and on the economy, if you don't want always-on access.
The U.S. Military Academy (West Point) already does this to a large extent. The engineering and science majors have to take a reasonable dose of humanities (Psych, Eng Lit/Comp, Int'l Relations, Poli Sci, foriegn language, all kinds of history) over the 4 years, and, perhaps more importantly, the liberal arts-type majors are mandated to take a minor in an engineering field. It makes for much more well-rounded thinkers... it's not the engineering they take, but the engineering thought process associated with it that is important.
It's also full tuition (and room/board/food).
Of course, definitely not for everyone, but a really good education for those who do go.
I've studied some ballisitics... these days, most armored vehicles would not be affected by the 'sharpness' of a bullet (assuming a kinetic-energy based round). Rather, factors like it's length-to-width ratio and material density play a much bigger role. Under the velocities we are talking about for a kinetic-energy round, the round 'melts' as it hits the armor and effectively tries to bore through it (and spew molten metal to the inside, injuring occupants and equipment, and maybe setting some ammo or fuel ablaze.)
The article mentions 'twice as strong as steel and titanium', yet does not quote which 'strength' this refers to (or gives any real objective data). I suspect it might have high tensile strength (hard to break by pulling it apart)...
But materials like this tend also to be brittle, and do not do well in other kinds of loading. Take 'fatigue' loading, for instance. This measures how well it holds up to repeated loads, such as crankshaft in a car. Materials with uncrystalline structures not only tend to fail quickly under repeated loads, but also tend to fell catastrophically (breaking in two, instead of gradually bending).
The article doesn't give enough info to verify this - just my thoughts. In material science, you generally have to make a compromise - in this case, tensile strength against fatigue life.
Having seen this posted on Slashdot, perhaps legions of geeks will sign up for a tour. Just because they saw it on Slashdot, which seems to be a good enough reason for us to believe any news or purchase any product (while we belittle people who do the same thing when Microsoft says something.)
Actually, could be a really good thing...
All the good equipment runs on Unix-based systems, especially anything where security is important.
One small comment -- the US Armed forces do NOT want 'flesh robots' - mindless soldiers mindlessly following orders. That would be both dangerous and ineffective.
Dangerous - it could lead to disasters/travesties when people do not question an immoral or incorrect order when appropriate.
Less effective -- a soldier who understands the commander's intent and the situation around them can react to the unexpected and perform the mission the best way possible, rather than following a static plan.
We need soldiers who can think!
Difficulties with interference
on
Optical SETI
·
· Score: 2
I am not a subject-matter expert, but I was doing some reading today about various forms of communication and transmission media, and the pros/cons of each...
For beings from another planet to contact us with focused optics, they cannot use a 'broadcast' approach (one source sent out to many users, a la radio stations). If they were trying to use a focused laser, this implies they'd have to know where we are in the first place (and would have known for the years the light had to travel)... or, if from far enough away, they would have had to sent the light to us before we existed!
I dunno, it seems to me that anyone out there would be far more likely to send a broadcast signal that finds us by chance, rather than a focused one, given the very short time we've had the technology to send/receive these sorts of communication. Thoughts?
I see your point - success in Civ definitely depended on understanding (and micro-managing) those simple models (enough extra food = population increase, trade * tax rate = tax income) to increase population, gain tech, fight battles, etc. But I do think it helped with the idea of cause-and-effect type history, especially in cases (most of 'em) where there is not a single, clear proximate cause.
I'm trying to place it more exactly... what might have helped... maybe having the mindset of leading a state? What are the concerns to me?
"Let's see - security of my own personal position (generally not a prob. in civ, you can't be deposed/assassinated/not re-elected), the security of the state (who are my neighbors? are they strong? threatening? who are my allies? if I am outnumbered/outgunned, who can I ally with (regardless of being strange-bedfellows) to get me out of the jam?)... let's see... I also want to have a large, happy population (begs the question of 'why' - in the game, it's for points. in reality, maybe for glory, fame, popularity?)"
As a civ ruler, I tend to hold grudges, even for a long time. There are civs I like and I don't like. But, at the same time, I tend to do the expedient thing, regardless of who I like...
This can be seen as a bit of a sad commentary - history reflects this -- the struggle for power, glory, and security overshadowing everything else. Why did Napoleon attack Russia in the winter? Why were religions sometimes used as tools of the state to manipulate citizens to fight? Why do I care about instability in Europe (my trading partners)? Why can countries that fought war be good friends a decade or two later?
Sorry if I rambled a bit, I'm just trying to figure it out, and I think a lot of it has to do with displacing the idealistic 'if i were president, there would be world peace' idea with the reality of 'dang, i played this game, and I did the same stuff (only better!)'... I guess it helped me see how things interacted.
A side note - perhaps the game created a greater interest for me in these subjects - that could have definitely contributed to success.
A question for you - Whether or not you have developed an understanding of history that is useful outside of Civilization or social studies classes is another question entirely.
What would you consider an understanding of history useful outside of Civ/Academia to be? (Not being sarcastic, I am genuinely interested in your response.)
I'd start with understanding why things happen now the way they do... why wars happen, why social change happens, why economies go up and down, stuff like that... being able to understand is important enough for me. Also, the idea of 'those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it' comes to mind. What do you think?
This is an interesting point... I played a whole lot of Civilizations back in the day (still do time to time)... when I took higher level history classes, macro-economics classes, even a terrain analysis class, I found myself doing extremely well (in these classes, outside of my major.)
When I'd help others with them, and they'd ask 'how does all this make sense to you?', I knew Civ had a lot to do with it. No, it didn't teach me all the stuff, but it gave me a mindset, it gave me a framework, I could see the 'big picture' so much better than fellow students who were trying to learn from textbooks. I caught onto Machiavelli's maxims before I'd finished reading them.
Many classes - Poli Sci, International Relations... I had a definitive edge in all of them.
And, of course, I absolutely smoked "History of the Military Art"!
Of course, Civ and descendants are not your typical video games. They didn't help my hand-eye coordination a bit -- that is where moderation, activity, and occasional-exposure-to-direct-sunlight come into play. And if someone had told me that Civ was going to be an educational game, I probably would have never touched it.
Slashdot Mirror
My goodness that was funny. I wish I had mod points, even though you posted AC.
So, I pulled up slashdot for some dinner reading in my hotel room... got out some good chips and chunky salsa... then I read this story. I hate wasting salsa, but I just can't eat it now. I wonder if it is young salsa...
Hmm... I was focused more on the idea of not teaching it in high school. I can see your point. My counterargument is that a Bachelor's of Arts/Science should connote some base level of proficiency in all basic fields, as well as deeper study in the area of concentration. I concede that my viewpoint is not universally accepted, though.
I completely agree -- in fact, I currently teach a calculus-based Physics course. I was trying to get the author the benefit of the doubt -- I understand that other institutions offer algebra-based Physics for pre-med students and the like. It is simply comical to think of doing any real science without algebra.
If we stop teaching algebra to all students at the high school or early college level, we are closing certain doors to them. You simply cannot master an entry-level, algebra-based Physics course without geometry and a lot of algebra work. If you can't do that, you cannot major in physics, most engineering subjects, nor math itself. I think economics would be a stretch as well.
If students (or parents) can choose to not take algebra at the 9th grade level, they are making a de facto decision that they will not study nor work in a STEM field later in life. Age 13 is awfully early to make that choice. They have not even attempted the challenge yet -- they do not know their abilities.
Even if they do continue in their studies and gain admittance to college, it will almost be a moot point. Their opportunities will have long since been limited.
When I moved recently, I decided to make the jump to an HTPC setup. Therefore, I was suddenly in the market for 3-4 Xbox 360's to act at Media Center extenders.
The going rate for a used Xbox at a retail store was around $179 at the time. However, searching in my local area on Craigslist, there were plenty listed in the $70 range, and I was able to negotiate down to an average price of $40 per Xbox 360.
Unless the Xbox 360 were a gift, you could save a ton of money going this route. I was even able to make sellers show me the Xbox plugged in, working, and able to login to Xbox live.
I did observe that most of the folks that were selling their Xbox 360's for pennies on the dollar were folks that probably shouldn't have bought them in the first place. In at least one case, I didn't drive nearly as hard of a bargain as I could have.
According to news.google.com, slashdot is considered a news source! It had one of the top headlines the other day.
I think you are right about the ISDN part, I'll have to look at that when I get back... unfortunately, starting tomorrow, I'll be looking for access in another, less hospitable place...
but anyway, try this link for the email name question - link. I got it out of an english-translation for the setup instructions. It will as for your t-online password (a 8 or 10 digit number IIRC), then you should prompted for a user name (all in german of course). Hit "Andern" to accept. (Hadn't tried it myself, I just use yahoo.)
One more comment, for linux users: You will need to know how to get linux working with the PPP protocol to get "T-DSL" up and running. One good website I've seen is this one. Not sure which distributions work with it off the bat, but I know it wasn't too easy for me. The telekom provided directions for getting it to work, but in German unfortunately, and I cannot translate German and linux at the same time yet!
The Deutsche Telekom sells flat-rate "T-DSL" for about 55 euros a month. The service is extremely reliable as compared to what I was used to in the states. However, it is a bit of pain to get the parts (three separate boxes) and get it turned on. Get some help from a German-speaking friend or soldier. (as a side bonus, with the flat DSL, you can call the US for 4 cents a minute)
They also sell time-based access cards on post, and on the economy, if you don't want always-on access.
Good luck!
is that enough to power my American house??
The U.S. Military Academy (West Point) already does this to a large extent. The engineering and science majors have to take a reasonable dose of humanities (Psych, Eng Lit/Comp, Int'l Relations, Poli Sci, foriegn language, all kinds of history) over the 4 years, and, perhaps more importantly, the liberal arts-type majors are mandated to take a minor in an engineering field. It makes for much more well-rounded thinkers... it's not the engineering they take, but the engineering thought process associated with it that is important.
It's also full tuition (and room/board/food).
Of course, definitely not for everyone, but a really good education for those who do go.
You are correct - wish I woulda seen that 'tech' page first. Thanks
I've studied some ballisitics... these days, most armored vehicles would not be affected by the 'sharpness' of a bullet (assuming a kinetic-energy based round). Rather, factors like it's length-to-width ratio and material density play a much bigger role. Under the velocities we are talking about for a kinetic-energy round, the round 'melts' as it hits the armor and effectively tries to bore through it (and spew molten metal to the inside, injuring occupants and equipment, and maybe setting some ammo or fuel ablaze.)
The article mentions 'twice as strong as steel and titanium', yet does not quote which 'strength' this refers to (or gives any real objective data). I suspect it might have high tensile strength (hard to break by pulling it apart)...
But materials like this tend also to be brittle, and do not do well in other kinds of loading. Take 'fatigue' loading, for instance. This measures how well it holds up to repeated loads, such as crankshaft in a car. Materials with uncrystalline structures not only tend to fail quickly under repeated loads, but also tend to fell catastrophically (breaking in two, instead of gradually bending).
The article doesn't give enough info to verify this - just my thoughts. In material science, you generally have to make a compromise - in this case, tensile strength against fatigue life.
Actually, could be a really good thing...
All the good equipment runs on Unix-based systems, especially anything where security is important.
You won't have to whine about job security.
You'll lose some weight.
You won't be in a cubicle, perhaps the modern day version of shovelling shit in Louisana.
One small comment -- the US Armed forces do NOT want 'flesh robots' - mindless soldiers mindlessly following orders. That would be both dangerous and ineffective.
Dangerous - it could lead to disasters/travesties when people do not question an immoral or incorrect order when appropriate.
Less effective -- a soldier who understands the commander's intent and the situation around them can react to the unexpected and perform the mission the best way possible, rather than following a static plan.
We need soldiers who can think!
I am not a subject-matter expert, but I was doing some reading today about various forms of communication and transmission media, and the pros/cons of each...
For beings from another planet to contact us with focused optics, they cannot use a 'broadcast' approach (one source sent out to many users, a la radio stations). If they were trying to use a focused laser, this implies they'd have to know where we are in the first place (and would have known for the years the light had to travel)... or, if from far enough away, they would have had to sent the light to us before we existed!
I dunno, it seems to me that anyone out there would be far more likely to send a broadcast signal that finds us by chance, rather than a focused one, given the very short time we've had the technology to send/receive these sorts of communication. Thoughts?
I see your point - success in Civ definitely depended on understanding (and micro-managing) those simple models (enough extra food = population increase, trade * tax rate = tax income) to increase population, gain tech, fight battles, etc. But I do think it helped with the idea of cause-and-effect type history, especially in cases (most of 'em) where there is not a single, clear proximate cause.
I'm trying to place it more exactly... what might have helped... maybe having the mindset of leading a state? What are the concerns to me?
"Let's see - security of my own personal position (generally not a prob. in civ, you can't be deposed/assassinated/not re-elected), the security of the state (who are my neighbors? are they strong? threatening? who are my allies? if I am outnumbered/outgunned, who can I ally with (regardless of being strange-bedfellows) to get me out of the jam?)... let's see... I also want to have a large, happy population (begs the question of 'why' - in the game, it's for points. in reality, maybe for glory, fame, popularity?)"
As a civ ruler, I tend to hold grudges, even for a long time. There are civs I like and I don't like. But, at the same time, I tend to do the expedient thing, regardless of who I like...
This can be seen as a bit of a sad commentary - history reflects this -- the struggle for power, glory, and security overshadowing everything else. Why did Napoleon attack Russia in the winter? Why were religions sometimes used as tools of the state to manipulate citizens to fight? Why do I care about instability in Europe (my trading partners)? Why can countries that fought war be good friends a decade or two later?
Sorry if I rambled a bit, I'm just trying to figure it out, and I think a lot of it has to do with displacing the idealistic 'if i were president, there would be world peace' idea with the reality of 'dang, i played this game, and I did the same stuff (only better!)'... I guess it helped me see how things interacted.
A side note - perhaps the game created a greater interest for me in these subjects - that could have definitely contributed to success.
A question for you -
Whether or not you have developed an understanding of history that is useful outside of Civilization or social studies classes is another question entirely.
What would you consider an understanding of history useful outside of Civ/Academia to be?
(Not being sarcastic, I am genuinely interested in your response.)
I'd start with understanding why things happen now the way they do... why wars happen, why social change happens, why economies go up and down, stuff like that... being able to understand is important enough for me. Also, the idea of 'those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it' comes to mind. What do you think?
This is an interesting point... I played a whole lot of Civilizations back in the day (still do time to time)... when I took higher level history classes, macro-economics classes, even a terrain analysis class, I found myself doing extremely well (in these classes, outside of my major.)
When I'd help others with them, and they'd ask 'how does all this make sense to you?', I knew Civ had a lot to do with it. No, it didn't teach me all the stuff, but it gave me a mindset, it gave me a framework, I could see the 'big picture' so much better than fellow students who were trying to learn from textbooks. I caught onto Machiavelli's maxims before I'd finished reading them.
Many classes - Poli Sci, International Relations... I had a definitive edge in all of them.
And, of course, I absolutely smoked "History of the Military Art"!
Of course, Civ and descendants are not your typical video games. They didn't help my hand-eye coordination a bit -- that is where moderation, activity, and occasional-exposure-to-direct-sunlight come into play. And if someone had told me that Civ was going to be an educational game, I probably would have never touched it.