It's actually not that hard to get into teaching, if one is willing to put in the work. Many states have alternative certification routes, which are used by programs like Teach For America and and a cornucopia of other programs of varying similarity that operate at state and local levels. Many people are skeptical of the idea of training someone for a summer and then allowing them to be a full-time teacher (with simultaneous continuing training). It's definitely not for everyone, but some people, it's a great way to get involved in teaching without extensive prep time.
To a large extent Teach For America is attempting to address this issue, and simultaneously, many school districts are implementing new pay scales and merit pay in order to better compete for the best talent.
But let me also say this: I am a graduate of an Ivy league master's program in electrical engineering and a Teach For America alumnus. I taught high school math for two years in inner-city Baltimore, and it was far and away the hardest thing I have ever done. My engineering program or any engineering work I have done in the past do not even chart in comparison. You can doubt what I'm saying if you want, but based on my own experience and my observation of many other extremely bright, talented, and resourceful people I know, teaching is the hardest job out there that doesn't deal with life or death on a daily basis (I will give the benefit of the doubt to paramedics, nurses, military, police, firefighters, etc.)
So to get to my point, recruiting talented people into teaching is only part of the problem. The more difficult part is training them to teach effectively and retaining them long enough for them to be effective. I, for one, did not last long enough in the career to ever reach my probablypotential. I couldn't handle the stress for more than two years. Had I the heart to stay in the profession, I probably would have continued to improve.
What I'm trying to say, and what may be new to many people on this board, is that the profession of teaching itself needs a complete overhaul. I won't get into the details, but there have been changes and trends in education over the past 10 years that, while well intentioned and possibly necessary, have dramatically increased the difficulty and stress of the job to the classroom teacher, to the point of absurdity.
The details of this thesis are way too much to get into in one comment, but if you are interested in the issues in education, read for yourself the diary of my experience teaching at my teaching journal. I'll warn you though, it's not very light reading.
That's wrong on so many levels. Just because the market will bear a higher cost doesn't mean that a higher cost is a good thing. For instance, if bands and venues really thought that charging maximum money was the best policy for them, they would simply charge the highest price the market would bear in the first place. They could auction all of the seats. But they don't. Why? Because they aren't trying to simply maximize ticket revenue. They don't benefit maximally by only the wealthiest possible people being able to attend shows. They benefit by building fanbase and goodwill. The best fans aren't necessarily the wealthiest.
If you've tried to buy a ticket for a major event in the past several years, you have felt the burn caused by these assholes. I don't know how many events I have seen "sell out" within literally seconds of tickets being made available. It's gotten to the point where I, and many other people I know, simply have given up on trying to get popular tickets.
So, from a purely capitalist standpoint, you can applaud these scalpers for sucking the market dry, but they accomplish this by hurting the suppliers and the ultimate consumers. And what benefit do they provide? Widespread frustration is actually not a good thing for the industry in the long run.
The problem is that market forces often seek an equilibrium that makes sense in the immediate term and does not take into effect externalities. Economics doesn't state that free market dynamics lead to the best possible outcome. Rather, it says that in absence (or even the presence of) regulation, the market will tend to seek that outcome, whether positive or negative. Libertarians, as you seem to be, ignore this aspect and insist in believing in the pipedream that somehow the free market outcome is the most positive. This may be true in some cases, but without knowing the externalities, it is impossible say this is the case a priori.
It's sad that you blindly glorify brigands like these people. Of course they're brilliant. But what they are doing is harmful and wrong, and it should not be allowed.
The issue is not that people are putting super-personal information on Facebook. Most intelligent people who actually care about their privacy know better than that. The problem is that there is a difference between sharing information with the people you know (even if they number in the hundreds) and publishing it to the world for any person or organization to see. I really don't care that much if the whole world knows my favorite movies and interests, but I see no reason to expose that information about me to people I don't know.
What is so aggravating is that Facebook started out as a site for the entertainment of its users, but that has taken a backseat to their ambition to become the new nexus of information on the Internet. Most of their changes could be really nice. By my count, there are three new "features" from the past couple weeks:
Opt-out Instant Personalization, which shares information between Facebook and several websites, giving them a more social dimension
Opt-out sharing of basically all of your profile with applications YOUR FRIENDS install on their accounts
Profile Connections, which networks and makes public most sections of your profile, and has completely replaced those profile sections
But instead of letting users make the decision whether to participate in these new initiatives, they have made them all the new default, or in the case of Profile Connections, it's there way or the highway. Of course Facebook has the right to run their website how they feel, but we as users don't have to put up with it.
In response to Facebook's cavalier attitude, I have deactivated my profile. However, I'm considering reactivating for one particular reason. Facebook is a fact of life now for most people, and it won't miss me much if I never come back. But I do want Facebook to change, and I'd like to continue to stay connected through it. Ironically, I have figured out that the best way for me to mobilize the people I know to demand change from Facebook is by reaching them through Facebook. I think I will try to organize a one day deactivation campaign. My deactivation isn't even a blip on their radar, but if dozens of people deactivate for a day, maybe that will turn some heads.
Well, you could keep it private, if the organization that runs this website provided you with privacy options and acted in a trustworthy and ethical way to maintain these options. Apparently this is a big problem though
The Godfather was a fantastic movie that is also reasonably true to the book, so I think it's very possible. Some of it probably won't translate. I imagine they might drop most of the detail from the newsstand and the comic-within-a-comic thing, and maybe simplify the backstory of the older heroes.
The trailers looked pretty enticing to me though, and I can't wait to see how it comes out
I doubt it. Not enough people bought the DC for pirating to matter. People didn't buy it for several reasons.
1. The Saturn flopped, and no one wanted to risk buying the loser of the next generation.
2. PS2 was on the horizon, and it was assumed that it would have better capabilities due to the extra time in the oven.
3. Dreamcast had awesome games, no doubt, but no killer game like GTA. That killed any hope of overcoming 1 and 2.
4. When PS2 finally did come out, the Dreamcast never fought back. Sega just folded it's hand for better, or for worse.
Dreamcast was a gamer's system, not an everyman system, and that doesn't fly for the business model it was built on
Amen to that! Shadowrun (for Genesis) is one of the most underrated games ever. I consider it a precursor to the GTA open-ended style of gameplay. I first played the game probably 12 years ago, and have played it through several times since. The fusion of RPG and action elements is incredible. As is the balance between the different ways in which the game can be played, and money and experience earned. I've always thought that with the increases in hardware power, the world is practically begging for an updated version of Shadowrun.
It definitely makes my top 10
"Simply let things work themselves out over time". Wow. So I guess you don't mind being the guy to march into inner city schools to tell the brown kids that it's just not their time. Just kidding, believe me, they already get the point.
I'm a black engineer who grew up, went to college, and now works in a predominantly white environment. By all rights, you'd imagine that I'd be used to being one of the few brown faces in a room, but it IS intimidating. The fact is, racism is alive and well in our society. I actually HEAR people making blanket remarks all the time about other ethnic groups, and it makes me wonder, what do they say about my ethnic group when I'm not around. It's not paranoia, it's fact: I'm judged by the color of my skin as soon as I walk in the door. At times, it's palpable.
I'm not blaming anybody, or saying it's a white problem, because it's not. And I'm not whining about it, I'm just telling you how it is. If you don't believe me, try walking through an area you don't traditionally belong, like a poor black neighborhood, and see how comfortable you feel. But, I guess it doesn't matter much does it, because you don't have any business to do there anyway.
I don't know if I buy your logic on $20 pricing. That might work IF the band is the only act, and they're only selling one CD that contains most of the material they just played. But most of the time when I'm checking out a band I've never heard of, I've got at most 30 bucks in my pocket, and often times, the band has 4 CD's on the shelf for $20. Even if I had the cash, there's no way I'm gonna blow $80 on some unknown band's back catalog. So I pick a random one, which may or may not be representative of their best work. Whereas, at 10 bucks a pop, I might buy 3, and feel way better about it. After all, I'm taking a chance
Not to mention, that I personally am highly inclined to buy a band's album at their concert anyway, which is pretty much the only avenue through which I buy music. Most of my friends would probably find the prospect of spending $20 to get an unknown band's CD ridiculous.
I think for an indie band trying to gain a following, their best bet is to price their CD's to move, with the intention of gaining more exposure at the expense of immediate profit. It's a lot easier to play some band's music for a friend who didn't see the show than to try to describe it
Re:Like an Ostrich with its head in the Sand
on
Has Ron Paul Quit?
·
· Score: 1
Quit it with your real information! We're fearmongering here
Without philosophy there is no science. Where do you think hypotheses come from anyway? Science depends on creativity and supposition, and cannot exist in a vacuum
You have got to be kidding...
I'm so tired of the knee-jerk self-hatred on these forums. The American system isn't perfect, but the British system is far from it either. I'm not even going to get started on the reasons why, but I suggest you take the time to research it.
It DOES matter, because each of these allegedly dying independent newspapers has its own owner, its own editor, its own staff, and its own online presence. This theoretically provides for an open market of ideas. I think that with this ruling, we're going to see media consolidation and elimination of real choice, as national news is simply chosen by the small cadre of national media overlords and syndicated to each local market. You could argue that wire services are just that, but the local news papers still get to choose what they want to run
Exactly right. The libertarians ignore how fundamentally difficult it is for new players to enter the so-called free market. Just because we have "blogs" now doesn't mean the playing field is level and the ordinary guy can just jump into the media business
I've always thought that to be the case. The real differences between the electable candidates from either party are so minute as to be almost laughable. It's not that hard to imagine most of the front runners being members of the opposite party
The standard way of handling this is by modeling the quantization error as added noise. Then the Nyquist theorem still holds, for the signal plus the quantization noise, and you can make accurate statements about your output signal based on analysis of the noise
...but the Jews still lived there, and many wars were waged, despite their lack of sovereignty. As far as I can see, the original post didn't say anything about Jewish sovereignty.
Slashdot Mirror
It's actually not that hard to get into teaching, if one is willing to put in the work. Many states have alternative certification routes, which are used by programs like Teach For America and and a cornucopia of other programs of varying similarity that operate at state and local levels. Many people are skeptical of the idea of training someone for a summer and then allowing them to be a full-time teacher (with simultaneous continuing training). It's definitely not for everyone, but some people, it's a great way to get involved in teaching without extensive prep time.
Well said, sir!
To a large extent Teach For America is attempting to address this issue, and simultaneously, many school districts are implementing new pay scales and merit pay in order to better compete for the best talent.
But let me also say this: I am a graduate of an Ivy league master's program in electrical engineering and a Teach For America alumnus. I taught high school math for two years in inner-city Baltimore, and it was far and away the hardest thing I have ever done. My engineering program or any engineering work I have done in the past do not even chart in comparison. You can doubt what I'm saying if you want, but based on my own experience and my observation of many other extremely bright, talented, and resourceful people I know, teaching is the hardest job out there that doesn't deal with life or death on a daily basis (I will give the benefit of the doubt to paramedics, nurses, military, police, firefighters, etc.)
So to get to my point, recruiting talented people into teaching is only part of the problem. The more difficult part is training them to teach effectively and retaining them long enough for them to be effective. I, for one, did not last long enough in the career to ever reach my probablypotential. I couldn't handle the stress for more than two years. Had I the heart to stay in the profession, I probably would have continued to improve.
What I'm trying to say, and what may be new to many people on this board, is that the profession of teaching itself needs a complete overhaul. I won't get into the details, but there have been changes and trends in education over the past 10 years that, while well intentioned and possibly necessary, have dramatically increased the difficulty and stress of the job to the classroom teacher, to the point of absurdity.
The details of this thesis are way too much to get into in one comment, but if you are interested in the issues in education, read for yourself the diary of my experience teaching at my teaching journal. I'll warn you though, it's not very light reading.
That's wrong on so many levels. Just because the market will bear a higher cost doesn't mean that a higher cost is a good thing. For instance, if bands and venues really thought that charging maximum money was the best policy for them, they would simply charge the highest price the market would bear in the first place. They could auction all of the seats. But they don't. Why? Because they aren't trying to simply maximize ticket revenue. They don't benefit maximally by only the wealthiest possible people being able to attend shows. They benefit by building fanbase and goodwill. The best fans aren't necessarily the wealthiest.
If you've tried to buy a ticket for a major event in the past several years, you have felt the burn caused by these assholes. I don't know how many events I have seen "sell out" within literally seconds of tickets being made available. It's gotten to the point where I, and many other people I know, simply have given up on trying to get popular tickets.
So, from a purely capitalist standpoint, you can applaud these scalpers for sucking the market dry, but they accomplish this by hurting the suppliers and the ultimate consumers. And what benefit do they provide? Widespread frustration is actually not a good thing for the industry in the long run.
The problem is that market forces often seek an equilibrium that makes sense in the immediate term and does not take into effect externalities. Economics doesn't state that free market dynamics lead to the best possible outcome. Rather, it says that in absence (or even the presence of) regulation, the market will tend to seek that outcome, whether positive or negative. Libertarians, as you seem to be, ignore this aspect and insist in believing in the pipedream that somehow the free market outcome is the most positive. This may be true in some cases, but without knowing the externalities, it is impossible say this is the case a priori.
It's sad that you blindly glorify brigands like these people. Of course they're brilliant. But what they are doing is harmful and wrong, and it should not be allowed.
The issue is not that people are putting super-personal information on Facebook. Most intelligent people who actually care about their privacy know better than that. The problem is that there is a difference between sharing information with the people you know (even if they number in the hundreds) and publishing it to the world for any person or organization to see. I really don't care that much if the whole world knows my favorite movies and interests, but I see no reason to expose that information about me to people I don't know.
What is so aggravating is that Facebook started out as a site for the entertainment of its users, but that has taken a backseat to their ambition to become the new nexus of information on the Internet. Most of their changes could be really nice. By my count, there are three new "features" from the past couple weeks:
But instead of letting users make the decision whether to participate in these new initiatives, they have made them all the new default, or in the case of Profile Connections, it's there way or the highway. Of course Facebook has the right to run their website how they feel, but we as users don't have to put up with it.
In response to Facebook's cavalier attitude, I have deactivated my profile. However, I'm considering reactivating for one particular reason. Facebook is a fact of life now for most people, and it won't miss me much if I never come back. But I do want Facebook to change, and I'd like to continue to stay connected through it. Ironically, I have figured out that the best way for me to mobilize the people I know to demand change from Facebook is by reaching them through Facebook. I think I will try to organize a one day deactivation campaign. My deactivation isn't even a blip on their radar, but if dozens of people deactivate for a day, maybe that will turn some heads.
Well, you could keep it private, if the organization that runs this website provided you with privacy options and acted in a trustworthy and ethical way to maintain these options. Apparently this is a big problem though
The Godfather was a fantastic movie that is also reasonably true to the book, so I think it's very possible. Some of it probably won't translate. I imagine they might drop most of the detail from the newsstand and the comic-within-a-comic thing, and maybe simplify the backstory of the older heroes. The trailers looked pretty enticing to me though, and I can't wait to see how it comes out
I doubt it. Not enough people bought the DC for pirating to matter. People didn't buy it for several reasons. 1. The Saturn flopped, and no one wanted to risk buying the loser of the next generation. 2. PS2 was on the horizon, and it was assumed that it would have better capabilities due to the extra time in the oven. 3. Dreamcast had awesome games, no doubt, but no killer game like GTA. That killed any hope of overcoming 1 and 2. 4. When PS2 finally did come out, the Dreamcast never fought back. Sega just folded it's hand for better, or for worse. Dreamcast was a gamer's system, not an everyman system, and that doesn't fly for the business model it was built on
Amen to that! Shadowrun (for Genesis) is one of the most underrated games ever. I consider it a precursor to the GTA open-ended style of gameplay. I first played the game probably 12 years ago, and have played it through several times since. The fusion of RPG and action elements is incredible. As is the balance between the different ways in which the game can be played, and money and experience earned. I've always thought that with the increases in hardware power, the world is practically begging for an updated version of Shadowrun. It definitely makes my top 10
"Simply let things work themselves out over time". Wow. So I guess you don't mind being the guy to march into inner city schools to tell the brown kids that it's just not their time. Just kidding, believe me, they already get the point.
I'm a black engineer who grew up, went to college, and now works in a predominantly white environment. By all rights, you'd imagine that I'd be used to being one of the few brown faces in a room, but it IS intimidating. The fact is, racism is alive and well in our society. I actually HEAR people making blanket remarks all the time about other ethnic groups, and it makes me wonder, what do they say about my ethnic group when I'm not around. It's not paranoia, it's fact: I'm judged by the color of my skin as soon as I walk in the door. At times, it's palpable.
I'm not blaming anybody, or saying it's a white problem, because it's not. And I'm not whining about it, I'm just telling you how it is. If you don't believe me, try walking through an area you don't traditionally belong, like a poor black neighborhood, and see how comfortable you feel. But, I guess it doesn't matter much does it, because you don't have any business to do there anyway.
I don't know if I buy your logic on $20 pricing. That might work IF the band is the only act, and they're only selling one CD that contains most of the material they just played. But most of the time when I'm checking out a band I've never heard of, I've got at most 30 bucks in my pocket, and often times, the band has 4 CD's on the shelf for $20. Even if I had the cash, there's no way I'm gonna blow $80 on some unknown band's back catalog. So I pick a random one, which may or may not be representative of their best work. Whereas, at 10 bucks a pop, I might buy 3, and feel way better about it. After all, I'm taking a chance Not to mention, that I personally am highly inclined to buy a band's album at their concert anyway, which is pretty much the only avenue through which I buy music. Most of my friends would probably find the prospect of spending $20 to get an unknown band's CD ridiculous. I think for an indie band trying to gain a following, their best bet is to price their CD's to move, with the intention of gaining more exposure at the expense of immediate profit. It's a lot easier to play some band's music for a friend who didn't see the show than to try to describe it
Quit it with your real information! We're fearmongering here
Without philosophy there is no science. Where do you think hypotheses come from anyway? Science depends on creativity and supposition, and cannot exist in a vacuum
Streets of SimCity was flawed but awesome. That's one game I wish they had made a sequel of.
You have got to be kidding... I'm so tired of the knee-jerk self-hatred on these forums. The American system isn't perfect, but the British system is far from it either. I'm not even going to get started on the reasons why, but I suggest you take the time to research it.
It DOES matter, because each of these allegedly dying independent newspapers has its own owner, its own editor, its own staff, and its own online presence. This theoretically provides for an open market of ideas. I think that with this ruling, we're going to see media consolidation and elimination of real choice, as national news is simply chosen by the small cadre of national media overlords and syndicated to each local market. You could argue that wire services are just that, but the local news papers still get to choose what they want to run
Exactly right. The libertarians ignore how fundamentally difficult it is for new players to enter the so-called free market. Just because we have "blogs" now doesn't mean the playing field is level and the ordinary guy can just jump into the media business
I've always thought that to be the case. The real differences between the electable candidates from either party are so minute as to be almost laughable. It's not that hard to imagine most of the front runners being members of the opposite party
I'm too drunk to explain, but you have it all wrong. All of it. Please look up CMOS on wikipedia or something
The standard way of handling this is by modeling the quantization error as added noise. Then the Nyquist theorem still holds, for the signal plus the quantization noise, and you can make accurate statements about your output signal based on analysis of the noise
That's because a 22kHz sampling rate means that the highest frequency that can be reproduced is 11kHz, which is well within the human hearing range.
Dude, I've got the Anjous, and sometimes I just turn the music off. It gets in the way of the cables
If I told you I was gonna kick you in the balls before I did it, would you feel better about it?
Boo frickin hoo. I guess you should have A) picked a better degree, B) gone to a better school, or C) gone someplace cheaper.
...but the Jews still lived there, and many wars were waged, despite their lack of sovereignty. As far as I can see, the original post didn't say anything about Jewish sovereignty.