> Sen. Wyden believes the Director of National Intelligence (Clapper) gave a straight answer
I did not see that at all in the citation.
In the citation: I gave his office a chance to amend his answer,” Wyden said.
In the citation: Wyden doesn’t directly accuse Clapper of lying to or misleading senators, but suggests he should have been able to be more accurate.
I see that as a polite what of saying Clapper was straight out lying.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asks Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper whether the National Security Agency collects “any type of data at all on millions of Americans.” Clapper responded, “No, sir”
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/11/sen-wyden-clapper-didnt-give-straight-answer-on-nsa-programs/)
Snowden says he did "X". Snowden releases information that verifies he did "X". NSA head Alexander says "X" is not possible. Head of Intelligence Committee Rogers says Snowden is lying. "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker.
QED IFF Snowden is telling truth and Alexander and Rogers are lying.
Or i'm refering to a different "X". What is "X" and what / when did Snowden release info verifying?
>Snowden says he did "X". "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker. QED.
Not quite. You may be able to say "Snowden says he did "X". "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore claims he broke the law. Snowden claims he is a lawbreaker." But there's no QED.
Snowden says he traveled faster than light. FTL is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker and can actually travel FTL. QED?
And we really should do it right the first time, rather than add on expensive change requests. It needs DNA samples, hair samples, urine samples, sperm samples, voice samples,...
Yes, this is a good point. Should jurors be paid at minimum wage? At average per capita? At their current rate? What about child care? What about job guarantees so you don't get fired while you're on jury duty?
"government...they" - you probably meant "government....we"
Yes, it is a civic duty, and one we should be perform diligently by competent people. I've been called up three times in thirty years. My fellow jurors were a mix of too few competent people and others who thought they would be on television and other who just wanted to vote and go home. I was distressed to see how easily some could be led. In one case i swayed the jurors from the initial verdict of Guilty to Not Guilty, and then finally back to Guilty. One person made the decision, the other eleven just nodded and went along with it. Its was frightening. I wonder if we need to train jurors and keep the good ones, but then who gets to decide who's "good"?
To you and the others who imply "You must be incompetent because you could have just Googled it..." I'm guessing the OP actually DID google it, and was hoping that slashdot might be more useful than a simple google search.
You should also mention two weeks holiday at Christmas and a pretty good pension plan. And a six hour day - teachers "work" only 9-3, right? So $80K/(180 days*6 hrs/day) = $74/hr.
If it's really this good and easy, then WHY AREN'T YOU DOING IT?
Wait, people CAN pay to have their kids go to private schools. I know lots that do. Maybe you want to complain that they'd be paying twice, once with taxes and once in private school tuition. But it's not twice. Their school taxes are probably only about 10% of private school tuition.
So, offer your average parent a $1000 tax savings v. $10K per child tuition bill.
>most private schools are far superior than public education Provide proof please. Scientific proof. Proof that factors in the student's total learning environment. Proof that controls for the fact that private school kids have parents that value education enough to fork over an extra $10k/yr/kids, and maybe pay attention to their kids. Proof, please, or STFU.
My wife is a teacher and keeps calling me to get the real answers because the IT folk in her school district lacked any real knowledge of any topic and could only fix/implement things by script. (well, that's not really true, but one or two instances lead to easy generalizations, don't they)
If teaching was really so easy and so well paid, then you (yes - YOU) could use your superior skills and abilities to make a real difference in the world and a substantial contribution to society by quitting your bit-twiddling, script-reading, Windoze-hating, printer cartridge-changing job and start teaching. So why don't you?
Teachers are becoming the targets of the new skinheads, with pogroms just around the corner. Wisconsin and Florida are leading the way.
Today we had someone wanting advice on getting his kid to read sci-fi, now someone wanting advice on getting his friends to watch Star Trek. I see what we've become. I'd like some advice on getting my GF to enjoy pron. What websites should we try?
>read ahead Yeah, we did this too. The kids kept two bookmarks in the books, one for them and one for us to resume reading aloud. Theirs was always ahead, but they always wanted to hear us read from the earlier bookmark.
Reading aloud works for quite awhile. I was a parent at sixth-grade camp a few times. On the first night the kids would be pretty rowdy, not settling down. I just sat and started reading aloud in a normal voice, probably "Hatchet" or "Have Spacesuit" and kids would start shushing each other to listen. On subsequent nights they would settle right in and ask for the story.
Just a way for them leets (wouldn't it be cool if there were a special way to spell that?) to feel superior to us under-rock-dwellers who prefer text to choppy video.
> an argument over the semantics of the word 'semantics'?
Yes, and i'm apparently not making a very good job of it. I thought i said "x", but the reply was "No, "x"" I'm unclear as to the difference between my "semantics is, the proper use of terminology" and "semantics is the matter of examining the underlying substance; what is actually being communicated"
Perhaps Samantha is saying that "the proper use of terminology" is syntax, and i should have said "the proper meaning of terminology"
> not semantics, but rather proper use of terminology Wait, isn't that exactly what semantics is, the proper use of terminology?
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - - that's all."
But just like in the war on drugs, there will be golden opportunities to scrape off a few bucks as the money goes flying around to build up a bureaucracy, buy more assault rifles and urban tanks, build more jails, and bamboozle the taxpayers. Follow the money.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm, somebody let a youngster onto /.
> Sen. Wyden believes the Director of National Intelligence (Clapper) gave a straight answer
I did not see that at all in the citation.
In the citation: I gave his office a chance to amend his answer,” Wyden said.
In the citation: Wyden doesn’t directly accuse Clapper of lying to or misleading senators, but suggests he should have been able to be more accurate.
I see that as a polite what of saying Clapper was straight out lying.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asks Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper whether the National Security Agency collects “any type of data at all on millions of Americans.” Clapper responded, “No, sir”
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/11/sen-wyden-clapper-didnt-give-straight-answer-on-nsa-programs/)
Snowden says he did "X". Snowden releases information that verifies he did "X". NSA head Alexander says "X" is not possible. Head of Intelligence Committee
Rogers says Snowden is lying. "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker.
QED IFF Snowden is telling truth and Alexander and Rogers are lying.
Or i'm refering to a different "X". What is "X" and what / when did Snowden release info verifying?
>Snowden says he did "X". "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker. QED.
Not quite. You may be able to say "Snowden says he did "X". "X" is against the law. Snowden therefore claims he broke the law. Snowden claims he is a lawbreaker." But there's no QED.
Snowden says he traveled faster than light. FTL is against the law. Snowden therefore broke the law. Snowden is a lawbreaker and can actually travel FTL. QED?
And we really should do it right the first time, rather than add on expensive change requests. It needs DNA samples, hair samples, urine samples, sperm samples, voice samples,...
Yes, this is a good point. Should jurors be paid at minimum wage? At average per capita? At their current rate? What about child care? What about job guarantees so you don't get fired while you're on jury duty?
"government...they" - you probably meant "government....we"
Yes, it is a civic duty, and one we should be perform diligently by competent people. I've been called up three times in thirty years. My fellow jurors were a mix of too few competent people and others who thought they would be on television and other who just wanted to vote and go home. I was distressed to see how easily some could be led. In one case i swayed the jurors from the initial verdict of Guilty to Not Guilty, and then finally back to Guilty. One person made the decision, the other eleven just nodded and went along with it. Its was frightening. I wonder if we need to train jurors and keep the good ones, but then who gets to decide who's "good"?
I guess if you're ever on trial you'll be judged by a jury of your peers.
>seek to move them off my team
My wife teaches programming to 7th graders, and marks down for bad/incomplete comments.
And so slashdot goes the way of digg and reddit, victim of those with nothing to say, and do anyway. WhatEvah. Next we'll have [k|t]itties.
I was recently gently derided for expecting more.
Are you recommending OpenGrade, then?
To you and the others who imply "You must be incompetent because you could have just Googled it..." I'm guessing the OP actually DID google it, and was hoping that slashdot might be more useful than a simple google search.
You should also mention two weeks holiday at Christmas and a pretty good pension plan. And a six hour day - teachers "work" only 9-3, right? So $80K/(180 days*6 hrs/day) = $74/hr.
If it's really this good and easy, then WHY AREN'T YOU DOING IT?
Pay teachers less and less until their outcome improves. I like your ideas.
"And the beatings will continue until morale improves."
and who would complain bitterly that all his "raw materials" weren't standardized.
Wait, people CAN pay to have their kids go to private schools. I know lots that do. Maybe you want to complain that they'd be paying twice, once with taxes and once in private school tuition. But it's not twice. Their school taxes are probably only about 10% of private school tuition.
So, offer your average parent a $1000 tax savings v. $10K per child tuition bill.
>most private schools are far superior than public education
Provide proof please. Scientific proof. Proof that factors in the student's total learning environment. Proof that controls for the fact that private school kids have parents that value education enough to fork over an extra $10k/yr/kids, and maybe pay attention to their kids. Proof, please, or STFU.
My wife is a teacher and keeps calling me to get the real answers because the IT folk in her school district lacked any real knowledge of any topic and could only fix/implement things by script. (well, that's not really true, but one or two instances lead to easy generalizations, don't they)
If teaching was really so easy and so well paid, then you (yes - YOU) could use your superior skills and abilities to make a real difference in the world and a substantial contribution to society by quitting your bit-twiddling, script-reading, Windoze-hating, printer cartridge-changing job and start teaching. So why don't you?
Teachers are becoming the targets of the new skinheads, with pogroms just around the corner. Wisconsin and Florida are leading the way.
Today we had someone wanting advice on getting his kid to read sci-fi, now someone wanting advice on getting his friends to watch Star Trek. I see what we've become. I'd like some advice on getting my GF to enjoy pron. What websites should we try?
>read ahead
Yeah, we did this too. The kids kept two bookmarks in the books, one for them and one for us to resume reading aloud. Theirs was always ahead, but they always wanted to hear us read from the earlier bookmark.
Reading aloud works for quite awhile. I was a parent at sixth-grade camp a few times. On the first night the kids would be pretty rowdy, not settling down. I just sat and started reading aloud in a normal voice, probably "Hatchet" or "Have Spacesuit" and kids would start shushing each other to listen. On subsequent nights they would settle right in and ask for the story.
I see the redditors are here. We'll have boobs and puppies next.
Just a way for them leets (wouldn't it be cool if there were a special way to spell that?) to feel superior to us under-rock-dwellers who prefer text to choppy video.
>why ask a question you already know the answer to
Now we can't tell him to go do his own research and RTFM
> an argument over the semantics of the word 'semantics'?
Yes, and i'm apparently not making a very good job of it. I thought i said "x", but the reply was "No, "x""
I'm unclear as to the difference between my "semantics is, the proper use of terminology" and "semantics is the matter of examining the underlying substance; what is actually being communicated"
Perhaps Samantha is saying that "the proper use of terminology" is syntax, and i should have said "the proper meaning of terminology"
> not semantics, but rather proper use of terminology
Wait, isn't that exactly what semantics is, the proper use of terminology?
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - - that's all."
But just like in the war on drugs, there will be golden opportunities to scrape off a few bucks as the money goes flying around to build up a bureaucracy, buy more assault rifles and urban tanks, build more jails, and bamboozle the taxpayers. Follow the money.