If you hook an ipod to your computer, can you buy new copies of songs you already have? If you can, you could load them onto the ipod only, maybe? I don't have an ipod or itunes but it makes sense in theory at least. That would be one way around this issue, not that I have any information about what was actually done here.
That would be outstanding. Holy crap. "And now, let's see what's going on on MY space station" and maybe put some Tek Jansen on it. Colbert is quite a sharp guy and could really make a lot of this.
I'm pretty sure that he wasn't making a mockery of NASA by directing viewers to vote for him. If anything, it was a mockery of Scientology. I would think the NASA folks would appreciate that on some level.
There is, as you say, no reason for NASA to use his name, as per their contest rules. If Colbert didn't like the contest rules, he should have formally protested sooner than this. The fact that he's simply ranting on his own comedy show is really fine with me.
This isn't my original thinking; I'm reposting from memory from a thread I read someplace else.
It is commonly accepted that under some circumstances, it is OK to kill people; the quickest example is war. However, in those circumstances, it is not acceptable to intentionally inflict more pain than necessary; the quickest example is torture. With animals, it is OK to both kill and inflict pain for some reason. The amount of pain is waved away by results that the practitioner gains; i.e. the taste of meat. I have no way of knowing what meat tastes like to say one way or the other.
Me again - the issue is whether such a calculation is even valid for making moral decisions. I vote no because I make a distinction between self interest and the moral good. They coincide in some cases, and in some cases they do not. They are not inherently identical. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned survival. For a long time, human survival has not depended on meat consumption. What humans gain from meat that they cant't from other food products is carnal sensations in the mouth, and that's it.
I had a student staying after school to retake a quiz and was reading this thread. After he was done, I was going to share the comment some ways back about being grateful that Alabama is not the bad guy this time. Anyway, as soon as I got to the word "evolution," he come up with "evolution is basically a joke..." I tried to make the distinction for him between Darwin's theory of natural selection and evolution the observable fact. I asked him if something was observable, doesn't that make it a fact? He said no because you can't trust what you see. This boggled my mind. We talked for a while longer and finally I pointed him to Evolution as Fact and Theory. We'll see what he says if he reads it.
Well, I can only talk about my school, as you can with your experience. I guess if there's anything in the policy besides "don't" it doesn't really count as zero tolerance.
Actually it gives the administrators more time to be instructional leaders, which is what they're really supposed to be doing. I have as little idea of what that means as you do, but administrators are primarily supposed to support teachers in the educational component of school. Reducing the amount of time taken up by discipline should theoretically improve this function. It doesn't seem to work that way in practice, I agree.
Epi pens are a completely different story than OTC medications. Any teachers who have students who might need an epi pen have them in their classrooms and are trained at the beginning of each year. And I'm pretty sure the kids who use them are under a doctor's order and carry them around too. I can't say for certain. There are enough times when students are not in classrooms that they would need that. Like the cafeteria. I haven't been through the training myself since none of my students have such a condition. But really, the nurse's control of all medication doesn't necessarily mean that all medications must be housed in the nurse's office, although most are. In the case of an asthma inhaler, the control consists of the nurse's office being aware and having the doctor's order and making teachers aware of the student carrying the inhaler.
The point is that it's possible to make a reasonable policy to govern drugs of all kids within the student population and deal with extraordinary situations separately.
I'm unaware of any recreational use for OTC headache drugs,
The recreational use is to sell them as something else, or to mix them in with something else to sell more of whatever. Maybe grind them up and sell the resulting white powder. I've had 13 year old students who were dealing drugs before. Actual CDS, not aspirin in a little baggie.
These zero tolerance policies are just the latest (maybe not the LATEST latest) in a series of antes between schools and students. There was a time when a fight was handled by administrators and the students were suspended or expelled or whatever. Now we call the police. Kids are placed under arrest and led out in cuffs. There was a time when perhaps students were allowed to have bottles of juice, soda, etc in school. This was ended when a group of students got drunk before school in the locker room. So, I think zero tolerance is a result of years of kids working the gray areas of rules as hard as they can. Kids keep pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable so they can stand out for having the shortest skirt or the most obscene t shirt, then we get an extensive and overly strict dress code that restricts everyone more than one might think is necessary. Another example: the school system had a policy that clothes could not display weapons, but some students protested that images of the school mascot display a rifle with bayonet attached. The school was forced to change the mascot to be carrying an American flag. Maybe there's no harm in having a school mascot who is a Revolutionary soldier carrying a rifle, and maybe there is.
Just by the way, the policy at my current school is that the nurse's office controls all medication. If students will need advil or whatever during the day, they get a note at the beginning of the school year and the nurse keeps it on file. Then when they need, they can go down to the nurse's office and get their medicine. It seems reasonable enough, considering they don't need a note every time, just once for the school year.
This comment should not be taken as advocating strip searches.
I agree that it doesn't matter case-by-case, but I think it's important to watch for trends. If the majority of election fraud is committed by members of the same party, it could indicate a conspiracy at a higher level of the party than whatever level the individual elections decided.
How are wind and solar ever going to come down from being cost prohibitive if people discontinue their investment?
I think the answer is that someone else will come along and do the innovations necessary. There's no reason that Shell has to be involved, but likewise there's no reason they shouldn't be party to that process.
When the British ruled India, they put a system in place that empowered many Indians in government to say "no" and very few if any to say "yes." They couldn't have Indian people with much power, but they were fine with Indian people screening their calls, so to speak. When the British left, the system remained, and so if you want to get something done, you have to get past a lot of people to reach the person who is empowered. This means bribes.
Choosing to go to a particular school is one sign that you value education, or at least have an opinion about it. Those people's children miraculously do better in school. No pun intended. When public school students have parents who care about education, they usually do better too, but there's really no guarantee. What is guaranteed is that private schools can deny access to any student they want, especially if they don't meet academic standards. This is one way to keep their standards and performance high that is not available to public schools.
It is also absolutely not true that if you bring up God in a public school that you're toast. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes meets every week at my school, and every day during the pledge to the flag we have the obligatory "under God."
Actually, in my first period class, one of my students told me that he doesn't feel that the school should be able to compel him to say the pledge to the flag. I told him I agreed and that I would never compel him to say anything, because this is America and you have a choice. So he doesn't usually, but today he did it by reflex and afterwards was upset with himself for just standing up and saying it even though he is opposed on principle. I doubt that his objections to being compelled to participate in a ritual would be met with much favor in a religious school.
I read a book once about introversion and extroversion. I don't remember the percentages, but a large majority of people are extroverts. How does this apply? Extroverts exist mostly outside of their heads and relate to the world mostly in terms of external things, i.e. the world itself. It's hard for an extrovert to talk about one thing and think about something else at the same time, for example. So when a TV show requires viewers to combine events on the screen with other things they know (comedy) or things they saw last week (episodic drama), then it kind of loses the extroverts. Introverts, by contrast, have an extensive inner world, and relating last week to this week or current events to political jokes is a breeze and enjoyable in itself.
A handy solution to this is "previously, on Lost..." but as that gets longer and longer it becomes in itself more objectionable.
The book, I just remembered, is The Introvert Advantage by Marti Laney. It's written as a self-help book, but even if you don't need help it has some pretty good insights.
It also seems that Amazon understands of customer service. I ordered an external hard drive and on the day that fedex reported it delivered, there was no package at my house. I called Amazon at 6:15 AM or so the next day on the off chance that someone would be able to help me. Actually I used the website and had them call me. Anyway they overnighted me a replacement drive, no questions asked. It would have been completely reasonable for the lady to ask me to wait one more day and see if it arrives and call again if not. But instead they decided to give me the benefit of the doubt, which is impressive these days.
One anecdote doesn't count for much I know, but it's a pretty sharp contrast to the anecdotes I'm reading about CC, and to my own experience at CC.
It seems that the definition for terrorism has been broadened (see USA Patriot Act) and that it doesn't take that much these days to be a "suspected" terrorist. Also consider that you're now prohibited by law from being aware of this official suspicion. The Obama DOJ, just this past week, did some legal maneuvering to avoid a ruling on whether the president can detain someone indefinitely without charges. That is, they filed charges, which is the Right Thing, but they did it in order to render the pending lawsuit moot. Just like the Bush DOJ did with Jose Padilla. In the current climate, RAND could write some pretty far fetched things that would not end up being that far fetched.
I don't know how long ago you were in military intelligence, but these days people leave their agency and then come back on Monday as a contractor with Booz Allen Hamilton or SAIC. If you haven't already, read Spies for Hire by Tim Shorrock.
The change that's come downward from business is all Microsoft all the time. Try again. Teacher unions don't set curriculum any more than than they plan the budget. Frankly, I try and use as much FLOSS in my classroom as I can, so that I can recommend the programs to my students. I can't recommend office or photoshop because of the price tag. Not that openoffice and GIMP are drop-in replacements by any means, but for what most of the students want to do (type up school assignments and screw around with digital still images), they work fine. We're laying out the literary magazine with Scribus this year.
Treat teenagers like adults they act like adults. Don't and they will always act like little children.
For students who are generally school-oriented, what you're saying is true. They appreciate being shown a little respect and consideration. For the rest of the school, being shown a little respect is a sign that the teacher is afraid of you and gives you a license to walk all over the teacher. Perhaps those kids will act the same way when they're adults so you're actually correct:)
Depending on the school, the ratio of "good kids" to "troublemakers" can be very high or very low. In my school, I think like 80% of the discipline referrals come from about 7-8% of the school population. So that's a pretty good ratio we have. But I've been in worse schools.
Slashdot Mirror
If you hook an ipod to your computer, can you buy new copies of songs you already have? If you can, you could load them onto the ipod only, maybe? I don't have an ipod or itunes but it makes sense in theory at least. That would be one way around this issue, not that I have any information about what was actually done here.
I hope there's some way to access these things to mess with once the games ship, like the Tauren Marine from last year's april 1.
Be sure to check out the Terratron.
That would be outstanding. Holy crap. "And now, let's see what's going on on MY space station" and maybe put some Tek Jansen on it. Colbert is quite a sharp guy and could really make a lot of this.
I'm pretty sure that he wasn't making a mockery of NASA by directing viewers to vote for him. If anything, it was a mockery of Scientology. I would think the NASA folks would appreciate that on some level.
There is, as you say, no reason for NASA to use his name, as per their contest rules. If Colbert didn't like the contest rules, he should have formally protested sooner than this. The fact that he's simply ranting on his own comedy show is really fine with me.
This isn't my original thinking; I'm reposting from memory from a thread I read someplace else.
It is commonly accepted that under some circumstances, it is OK to kill people; the quickest example is war. However, in those circumstances, it is not acceptable to intentionally inflict more pain than necessary; the quickest example is torture. With animals, it is OK to both kill and inflict pain for some reason. The amount of pain is waved away by results that the practitioner gains; i.e. the taste of meat. I have no way of knowing what meat tastes like to say one way or the other.
Me again - the issue is whether such a calculation is even valid for making moral decisions. I vote no because I make a distinction between self interest and the moral good. They coincide in some cases, and in some cases they do not. They are not inherently identical. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned survival. For a long time, human survival has not depended on meat consumption. What humans gain from meat that they cant't from other food products is carnal sensations in the mouth, and that's it.
These are the intellectual gymnastics mentioned earlier in the thread.
I had a student staying after school to retake a quiz and was reading this thread. After he was done, I was going to share the comment some ways back about being grateful that Alabama is not the bad guy this time. Anyway, as soon as I got to the word "evolution," he come up with "evolution is basically a joke..." I tried to make the distinction for him between Darwin's theory of natural selection and evolution the observable fact. I asked him if something was observable, doesn't that make it a fact? He said no because you can't trust what you see. This boggled my mind. We talked for a while longer and finally I pointed him to Evolution as Fact and Theory. We'll see what he says if he reads it.
Charitable giving is higher among Republicans than Democrats.
Remove churches from the count and see if this is still true.
Well, I can only talk about my school, as you can with your experience. I guess if there's anything in the policy besides "don't" it doesn't really count as zero tolerance.
Actually it gives the administrators more time to be instructional leaders, which is what they're really supposed to be doing. I have as little idea of what that means as you do, but administrators are primarily supposed to support teachers in the educational component of school. Reducing the amount of time taken up by discipline should theoretically improve this function. It doesn't seem to work that way in practice, I agree.
Epi pens are a completely different story than OTC medications. Any teachers who have students who might need an epi pen have them in their classrooms and are trained at the beginning of each year. And I'm pretty sure the kids who use them are under a doctor's order and carry them around too. I can't say for certain. There are enough times when students are not in classrooms that they would need that. Like the cafeteria. I haven't been through the training myself since none of my students have such a condition. But really, the nurse's control of all medication doesn't necessarily mean that all medications must be housed in the nurse's office, although most are. In the case of an asthma inhaler, the control consists of the nurse's office being aware and having the doctor's order and making teachers aware of the student carrying the inhaler.
The point is that it's possible to make a reasonable policy to govern drugs of all kids within the student population and deal with extraordinary situations separately.
I'm unaware of any recreational use for OTC headache drugs,
The recreational use is to sell them as something else, or to mix them in with something else to sell more of whatever. Maybe grind them up and sell the resulting white powder. I've had 13 year old students who were dealing drugs before. Actual CDS, not aspirin in a little baggie.
These zero tolerance policies are just the latest (maybe not the LATEST latest) in a series of antes between schools and students. There was a time when a fight was handled by administrators and the students were suspended or expelled or whatever. Now we call the police. Kids are placed under arrest and led out in cuffs. There was a time when perhaps students were allowed to have bottles of juice, soda, etc in school. This was ended when a group of students got drunk before school in the locker room. So, I think zero tolerance is a result of years of kids working the gray areas of rules as hard as they can. Kids keep pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable so they can stand out for having the shortest skirt or the most obscene t shirt, then we get an extensive and overly strict dress code that restricts everyone more than one might think is necessary. Another example: the school system had a policy that clothes could not display weapons, but some students protested that images of the school mascot display a rifle with bayonet attached. The school was forced to change the mascot to be carrying an American flag. Maybe there's no harm in having a school mascot who is a Revolutionary soldier carrying a rifle, and maybe there is.
Just by the way, the policy at my current school is that the nurse's office controls all medication. If students will need advil or whatever during the day, they get a note at the beginning of the school year and the nurse keeps it on file. Then when they need, they can go down to the nurse's office and get their medicine. It seems reasonable enough, considering they don't need a note every time, just once for the school year.
This comment should not be taken as advocating strip searches.
I agree that it doesn't matter case-by-case, but I think it's important to watch for trends. If the majority of election fraud is committed by members of the same party, it could indicate a conspiracy at a higher level of the party than whatever level the individual elections decided.
How are wind and solar ever going to come down from being cost prohibitive if people discontinue their investment?
I think the answer is that someone else will come along and do the innovations necessary. There's no reason that Shell has to be involved, but likewise there's no reason they shouldn't be party to that process.
When the British ruled India, they put a system in place that empowered many Indians in government to say "no" and very few if any to say "yes." They couldn't have Indian people with much power, but they were fine with Indian people screening their calls, so to speak. When the British left, the system remained, and so if you want to get something done, you have to get past a lot of people to reach the person who is empowered. This means bribes.
There's no mutual exclusion between having cheesy celebrations for pi day (or cinco de Mayo, etc) and teaching important things.
Choosing to go to a particular school is one sign that you value education, or at least have an opinion about it. Those people's children miraculously do better in school. No pun intended. When public school students have parents who care about education, they usually do better too, but there's really no guarantee. What is guaranteed is that private schools can deny access to any student they want, especially if they don't meet academic standards. This is one way to keep their standards and performance high that is not available to public schools.
It is also absolutely not true that if you bring up God in a public school that you're toast. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes meets every week at my school, and every day during the pledge to the flag we have the obligatory "under God."
Actually, in my first period class, one of my students told me that he doesn't feel that the school should be able to compel him to say the pledge to the flag. I told him I agreed and that I would never compel him to say anything, because this is America and you have a choice. So he doesn't usually, but today he did it by reflex and afterwards was upset with himself for just standing up and saying it even though he is opposed on principle. I doubt that his objections to being compelled to participate in a ritual would be met with much favor in a religious school.
I read a book once about introversion and extroversion. I don't remember the percentages, but a large majority of people are extroverts. How does this apply? Extroverts exist mostly outside of their heads and relate to the world mostly in terms of external things, i.e. the world itself. It's hard for an extrovert to talk about one thing and think about something else at the same time, for example. So when a TV show requires viewers to combine events on the screen with other things they know (comedy) or things they saw last week (episodic drama), then it kind of loses the extroverts. Introverts, by contrast, have an extensive inner world, and relating last week to this week or current events to political jokes is a breeze and enjoyable in itself.
A handy solution to this is "previously, on Lost..." but as that gets longer and longer it becomes in itself more objectionable.
The book, I just remembered, is The Introvert Advantage by Marti Laney. It's written as a self-help book, but even if you don't need help it has some pretty good insights.
It also seems that Amazon understands of customer service. I ordered an external hard drive and on the day that fedex reported it delivered, there was no package at my house. I called Amazon at 6:15 AM or so the next day on the off chance that someone would be able to help me. Actually I used the website and had them call me. Anyway they overnighted me a replacement drive, no questions asked. It would have been completely reasonable for the lady to ask me to wait one more day and see if it arrives and call again if not. But instead they decided to give me the benefit of the doubt, which is impressive these days.
One anecdote doesn't count for much I know, but it's a pretty sharp contrast to the anecdotes I'm reading about CC, and to my own experience at CC.
It seems that the definition for terrorism has been broadened (see USA Patriot Act) and that it doesn't take that much these days to be a "suspected" terrorist. Also consider that you're now prohibited by law from being aware of this official suspicion. The Obama DOJ, just this past week, did some legal maneuvering to avoid a ruling on whether the president can detain someone indefinitely without charges. That is, they filed charges, which is the Right Thing, but they did it in order to render the pending lawsuit moot. Just like the Bush DOJ did with Jose Padilla. In the current climate, RAND could write some pretty far fetched things that would not end up being that far fetched.
I don't know how long ago you were in military intelligence, but these days people leave their agency and then come back on Monday as a contractor with Booz Allen Hamilton or SAIC. If you haven't already, read Spies for Hire by Tim Shorrock.
The change that's come downward from business is all Microsoft all the time. Try again. Teacher unions don't set curriculum any more than than they plan the budget. Frankly, I try and use as much FLOSS in my classroom as I can, so that I can recommend the programs to my students. I can't recommend office or photoshop because of the price tag. Not that openoffice and GIMP are drop-in replacements by any means, but for what most of the students want to do (type up school assignments and screw around with digital still images), they work fine. We're laying out the literary magazine with Scribus this year.
There's also the small matter of the school board policy governing what teachers can do and not do. Not to mention the law.
Treat teenagers like adults they act like adults. Don't and they will always act like little children.
For students who are generally school-oriented, what you're saying is true. They appreciate being shown a little respect and consideration. For the rest of the school, being shown a little respect is a sign that the teacher is afraid of you and gives you a license to walk all over the teacher. Perhaps those kids will act the same way when they're adults so you're actually correct :)
Depending on the school, the ratio of "good kids" to "troublemakers" can be very high or very low. In my school, I think like 80% of the discipline referrals come from about 7-8% of the school population. So that's a pretty good ratio we have. But I've been in worse schools.