>> So are you saying that the people who have a lower socio-economic status than you or I shouldn't be allowed to home school their children?
I agree with the original poster - moreover, its demonstreable. Lookup freaky economics. Then get one of your below 50%'s to write a critical analysis of his numbers; then get all of them too. THEN, I might consider you *may* have a point.
>>Says the person who couldn't be bothered to proofread his post for spelling mistakes and/or typos. Sorry, I had to dig you for this one;)
not a surprise; look who he's addressing;) lol, sorry I had to to dig you for this:P
>>So what? Shouldn't parents have the right to teach their kids whatever they want? Why is it any business of the Government what I choose to teach to my kids?
you have my vote:) you can teach your kid *anything* you want to; just dont be surprised when he ends up screwed up 'cause he messed with someone who had a real education.
>>You actually used the term "those people"? If I was referring to a minority group as "those people" I'd probably be called a racist. Think of the language you are using and how it might read
you studied liberal arts, didn't you.... lol. those people = a group of people referenced apriori (means before).
>>Do you realize how arrogant that statement sounds?
sounded accurate. he raised some points. you didn't counter any of his. What makes you think people at the bottom of the population are anywhere near qualified to teach their kids? Either from a time-perspective, education-perspective, inclination-perspective or shudder, a preparedness-perspective?
>> People who are not scientifically inclined are almost always artistically inclined, something I will not be.
I try not to limit yourself --somebody:)
>>And I remind myself when I think I'm smarter than them: I may know physics of motion and can do the math required, but people who play sports know that exact same formulas intuitively
-- with one difference; you can pick up their sport fairly quickly (using ur formulas etc) -- your math/physics skills may be forever beyond their kine.
yuh; my exams were stuff that was one (mental) step ahead of what was in the book. they actually required figuring out new stuff during the test. I miss those tests. i learned so much from them.
Brother, well thought out, articulate and spot-on. Amen:) Most people get their education from the movies and video-games. I had a worker at my plant who was going on about the latest version of call-of-duty and how it had so many more cool guns - when I proceeded to actually discuss the real weapons in their historical context and pro's/con's, his eyes glazed over... despite the fact that guns modeled in the game are modeled to reflect the strengths/weaknesses of the *real* weapons.
His reasoning for glazing over; he didn't like the history (of anything!). no wonder why he's stuck working a crappy job despite being creative. there's no mental theme, just disconnected disjointed crap floating around.
Liberal arts doesn't train you for jack. I took 0 courses of liberal arts, and (I may be thinking outside the box here) yet I can still manage to go hmmmm this doesn't look right there's got to be a better way to do this.
And considering that "social skills" means more about
a) covering your ass
b) never saying anything that could possibly be considered unkind.... He passed away, moved on blah blah blah - fucker dropped dead 'cause he was shooting junk, good riddance
c) puts form over function -- here's a hint, form follows function - if someone has something to say to you, and feels the need to shove a chainsaw up your ass to accentuate his point, not getting the point (aka being obtuse) because it wasn't said nicely doesn't make you smarter. It makes you shallow and stupid.
Usually people with chainsaws inserting them into rectums are doing so 'cause you don't know something you're supposed to know, but *think* you do. and people who know things are *really* irritated by people who think they know things *wasting* their time. Translation: the next time you feel like discussing your ideas, know your subject *well*. If you don't, go back to reading before you attempt to engage in a discussion.
Mind you, I'm also artistically inclined - but its nothing more than a hobby 'cause I'ld much rather be working on discovering something new or novel rather than trying to write the great American novel or splashing paint on a canvass and calling it art.
you should study accounting 'cause its difficult to run a business unless you have some skill in book-keeping. That includes running someone *elses* business. And if you can't properly tally a cost to your project, than I daresay you're probably not a very good engineer. basic cost analysis depends on good record keeping. good record keeping in business ='s accounting.
I got a better solution. Give my parents back the money that was taken for public schools/schooling. Give me a credit card that only works at barnes and nobles, edmunds scientic, a machine-shop & some space. I would have been much better served I think.
Count me in; I'm dying to get back to a university -- there are far too many things I'ld like to discuss with people who are equally motivated. My only concern at this point is the cost; its too high relative to wages.
I still find how Julias Caesar beat Pompey relevant - whats antiquated about that? Or the basis of the banking system, money (thank you oh Lideans), etc. if you don't understand what the progression of ideas were, you really can't understand a) science b) economics c) peoples/cultures d) strategems/tactics e)cheating {the good kind, outsmarting ur opponent 'cause u're crib-sheet is 2000 years of human history} f) mistakes and how not to make them g) diagnostic abilities....and the list goes on.
I've had that new-fangled teaching, their is no right answer, only the process and you know what, it sucks. their is an optimal answer for every question, and guess what, the nuance of *correctly posing the problem* comes out when you try to find the optimal answer. Encouraging people to free-form think without any sort of tie to actual performance does no-one any credit - the smart ones are already well ahead of the curve and the dumb ones think that they made a comment in class somehow made them insightful.
Classic example - I spent a semester discussing the Lord of the Flies, William Goulding in English class -- oh the metaphors (and no it wasn't voluntary), and when it came time to write my paper i looked up an interview with the author in which he *clearly* stated he had written the book with no metaphors in mind - it was just a story and the language was what he was comfortable in writing - there were no overarching themes etc. a semester wasted (though I liked the book). Same deal with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, oy vey! I would have much (*MUCH*) rather spent some time in *frank* discussion about the shit that matters; economic, military, engineering, science, and cultural histories. Those things matter 'cause they effect every-day events.
Books, and kill the TV/Computer/Game System/Music/Phone/DumbassFriends. Trap the buggers indoors with nothing but books. When I was a kid my field trip/day out was to the local library. They can always socialize later (when they're capable of holding down a paycheck for something better than waitressing/computer lab/{insert crappy job}).
...and when that child is only concerned about fucking? what then, mr.wizard? last I checked, hormonally speaking, kids are way more interested in the approval of their classmates & getting a girlfriend/boyfriend. Knowing about the war of 1812 or the gold standard hinders that, not helps it..... Hell, you can't even teach them *sex-ed* 'cause they're too uptight about it.
when they can: a) read a book on the history of education at a college level, b) analyze several sources and synthesize it into a cogent hypothesis c) write an essay to explain what points support their theory, d) get up in front of their class and defend their points in a debate and e) win.
then they can start being dealt with as humans and not chattel; until then the switch. its not complicated; some people are animals (and understand only pain) and others are people (who can be reasoned with) -- educated people need to speak both languages.. Thats in Machiovelli/ThePrince in case u were interested in a cite;)
Lord. just bring back the switch and *real* tests, not this wimped crap. Poverty (dumb mothers who don't know any better than to work their womb) go a long way to perpetuating horrible students.
Detention, hand-cuff the bastards and then proceed to illustrate that probability theory e.g. the probability of you burning to death handcuffed to your desk increases the more time you spend in detention -- have them work out the probability and explain their models. correct answers get the key.:P
Sometimes, you just gotta lay down the law - like, hmmm, I know about six hundred different ways to kick your ass, and you know zilch. Perhaps I'll just beat your ass today and illustrate (by example) method #x. Sure the little bastards will turn out to be horrible parents but, guess what - their kids will be better students. The ones that live at any rate:)
Your part of the problem. I walked to school 30 minutes each way for years. I spent 2 hours (round trip) walking to my friends house. I spent six months walking (sans car) in cali, to and from work. whats your point wanker?
it's these two funny little things at the end, called feet - they're made for walking. an no offense, but really, "It is not unusual for schools to be isolated on the wrong side of major highways" would suggest you *BUILD A BRIDGE ACROSS IT* rather than buying (and maintaining) a fleet of buses to pick up kids *twice a day*.
wake up, your part of the problem.
kids are not dolls. they never were. parents are idiots. they weren't, but now they are. Welcome to your version of education.
Not on their skin color, on their ethnographic lines (established by voluntary disclosure during patient history, say);) People know where they came from (in 99% of the cases) - those that don't (ex-slaves + orphans) can establish general areas/relatives using genetic testing. And don't forget its not *all* genetics; environment has a lot to do with genotypic expression - classic example; a rare disease that was epidemic in Auschwitz, affecting children (ate their face off) - German doctors thought it might be genetic (e.g. Jews are inferior)given the rarity in Europe and the extreme (relatively speaking) prevalance in the camps. Turned out it was the malnutrition/septic conditions that were linked to the increased occurrence. Anyway I figure (given u're comments) that we see eye-to-eye on the subject:P:) only question is that of proper implementation while retaining privacy, non-eugenics, non-discriminatory crap from sneaking in./me suggests you hand out a leaflet with the odds precalculated:P let the patient pick it out:) If you are predominantly..... top diagnosis is X etc:) Sidesteps most of those issues + it involves the patient in his care.
Lord what part of it ain't personal dont you people understand:P:) I stated my *opinion* on a comment he made in passing about his wife. I'm sure she reads other Journals is competent etc. I'm also sure there's alot of idiotic doctors who *aren't* reading the right journals. and before you say anything else, keep in mind that *somebody* has to graduate at the bottom of their medical school class, and they *still* get to call themselves doctor. And who's to say that they are any more diligent in their work affairs than they were in their student affairs.
I prefer they get on PubMed and look up a paper from a peer-reviewed journal in their industry. And if there isn't one, they should get off their arse and write one (you know, advance the state of medicine by *gasp* actually analyzing their performance and writing a paper every now and then).
Best walking history is me:P I take an active interest in solving my health problems. Most other people are unfortunate in that they are neither capable of, interested in, or experienced enough to do likewise - and *those* are the ones that need doctors to take their history. Anyway, like I said it wasn't personal:) And my crack about the Europaen descent isn't really targeting Europaens - has to do with how medicine is treated strictly statistically, but most of the data is derived off of Europaen male population. Classic example - lactose intolerance -- here its an irritation, in Europe its considered a disorder. In other populations, it might be the norm e.g. disorders and their manifestations are inherently specific to populations, but the priority of treatment is not adjusted to consider the ethnographic lines a person comes from; especially when it comes to evaluating studies which are heavily drawn from one population to the exclusion of others, be it deliberate (as it used to be) or otherwise (money/expertise to conduct a study).
And before you say anything, keep in mind all the pharma's are doing there testing in India and China now;) that tendency is most likely going to come back and bite you in the arse;)
Anyway, its just a point of contention -- I ain't too happy with how medicine is practiced today and I took an opportunity to say so:P like i said it ain't personal:)
Technically, his comment regarding continuinity implying infinite regress *is* accurate; Newton considered this one of the fundamental flaws in his theory of fluxions (an ill-defined smallest unit of change). A fact I also independently came to at the tender young age of 17;) And when I went to my math professor and expressed my idea, he was very excited... Apparently its not all that common for people to realize the gross assumptions in the systems they are taught.
As to Zeno's paradox; its not a *real* problem in that you're particularly sloppy about what you use as your yardstick; translation: evaluation of distance (length) depends on the yard stick you use - overall length is *not* scale-invariant. And hence, given a scale (a particular length ruler), I can cross the room in X amounts of steps even though I aught not be able to. The question you should ask my friend is this: given ruler A (measuring in angstroms) and ruler B (measuring in kilometers), would you cross the same room in the same number of steps e.g. X_a = X_b ? and if this is not the case, then wouldn't you have to concur that zeno's paradox does indeed have teeth, if not feeble ones at your particular scale? And in considering your reply, do keep in mind that the trend in technology is to try to keep miniturizing everything....
Oh, and to the original asshole who started this, KEEP ON BEING AN ASSHOLE!!!!!!! just 'cause ignorant jackasses run things by sheer dint of numbers and limitless stupidity don't mean you ain't right:)
Slashdot Mirror
>Forcing kids to learn to read too early and you teach them that reading is a drag
perhaps. my experience indicates otherwise. and there is such a thing as critical mass to a knowledge-base.
>> So are you saying that the people who have a lower socio-economic status than you or I shouldn't be allowed to home school their children?
I agree with the original poster - moreover, its demonstreable. Lookup freaky economics. Then get one of your below 50%'s to write a critical analysis of his numbers; then get all of them too.
THEN, I might consider you *may* have a point.
>>Says the person who couldn't be bothered to proofread his post for spelling mistakes and/or typos. Sorry, I had to dig you for this one ;)
not a surprise; look who he's addressing ;) :P
lol, sorry I had to to dig you for this
>>So what? Shouldn't parents have the right to teach their kids whatever they want? Why is it any business of the Government what I choose to teach to my kids?
you have my vote :) you can teach your kid *anything* you want to; just dont be surprised when he ends up screwed up 'cause he messed with someone who had a real education.
>>You actually used the term "those people"? If I was referring to a minority group as "those people" I'd probably be called a racist. Think of the language you are using and how it might read
you studied liberal arts, didn't you.... lol.
those people = a group of people referenced apriori (means before).
>>Do you realize how arrogant that statement sounds?
sounded accurate. he raised some points. you didn't counter any of his. What makes you think people at the bottom of the population are anywhere near qualified to teach their kids? Either from a time-perspective, education-perspective, inclination-perspective or shudder, a preparedness-perspective?
>> People who are not scientifically inclined are almost always artistically inclined, something I will not be.
I try not to limit yourself --somebody :)
>>And I remind myself when I think I'm smarter than them: I may know physics of motion and can do the math required, but people who play sports know that exact same formulas intuitively
-- with one difference; you can pick up their sport fairly quickly (using ur formulas etc) -- your math/physics skills may be forever beyond their kine.
depends on who he knows, no? :)
so original poster, who do you know?
thats easy, liability.
teachers aren't liable for fucking up students.
I hereby call for the deathpenalty for bad teachers!
mod this guy up ;) at least on the two-squares a day/health care. I dont mind standardized testing provided they fix the tests for the next 100 years.
yuh; my exams were stuff that was one (mental) step ahead of what was in the book. they actually required figuring out new stuff during the test. I miss those tests. i learned so much from them.
Brother, well thought out, articulate and spot-on. Amen :) Most people get their education from the movies and video-games. I had a worker at my plant who was going on about the latest version of call-of-duty and how it had so many more cool guns - when I proceeded to actually discuss the real weapons in their historical context and pro's/con's, his eyes glazed over... despite the fact that guns modeled in the game are modeled to reflect the strengths/weaknesses of the *real* weapons.
His reasoning for glazing over; he didn't like the history (of anything!). no wonder why he's stuck working a crappy job despite being creative. there's no mental theme, just disconnected disjointed crap floating around.
WootWoot :0 they should just stop teaching it... oh wait, they have....
Liberal arts doesn't train you for jack. I took 0 courses of liberal arts, and (I may be thinking outside the box here) yet I can still manage to go hmmmm this doesn't look right there's got to be a better way to do this.
And considering that "social skills" means more about
a) covering your ass
b) never saying anything that could possibly be considered unkind .... He passed away, moved on blah blah blah - fucker dropped dead 'cause he was shooting junk, good riddance
c) puts form over function -- here's a hint, form follows function - if someone has something to say to you, and feels the need to shove a chainsaw up your ass to accentuate his point, not getting the point (aka being obtuse) because it wasn't said nicely doesn't make you smarter. It makes you shallow and stupid.
Usually people with chainsaws inserting them into rectums are doing so 'cause you don't know something you're supposed to know, but *think* you do. and people who know things are *really* irritated by people who think they know things *wasting* their time. Translation: the next time you feel like discussing your ideas, know your subject *well*. If you don't, go back to reading before you attempt to engage in a discussion.
Mind you, I'm also artistically inclined - but its nothing more than a hobby 'cause I'ld much rather be working on discovering something new or novel rather than trying to write the great American novel or splashing paint on a canvass and calling it art.
d) group-think. /me shudders.
you should study accounting 'cause its difficult to run a business unless you have some skill in book-keeping. That includes running someone *elses* business. And if you can't properly tally a cost to your project, than I daresay you're probably not a very good engineer. basic cost analysis depends on good record keeping. good record keeping in business ='s accounting.
WootWoot :)
my favorite, you can always hire one-half of the poor to kill the other half. :P screw welfare, bring back the gladiatoral games!
I got a better solution. Give my parents back the money that was taken for public schools/schooling. Give me a credit card that only works at barnes and nobles, edmunds scientic, a machine-shop & some space. I would have been much better served I think.
Count me in; I'm dying to get back to a university -- there are far too many things I'ld like to discuss with people who are equally motivated. My only concern at this point is the cost; its too high relative to wages.
I still find how Julias Caesar beat Pompey relevant - whats antiquated about that? Or the basis of the banking system, money (thank you oh Lideans), etc. if you don't understand what the progression of ideas were, you really can't understand a) science b) economics c) peoples/cultures d) strategems/tactics e)cheating {the good kind, outsmarting ur opponent 'cause u're crib-sheet is 2000 years of human history} f) mistakes and how not to make them g) diagnostic abilities ....and the list goes on.
I've had that new-fangled teaching, their is no right answer, only the process and you know what, it sucks. their is an optimal answer for every question, and guess what, the nuance of *correctly posing the problem* comes out when you try to find the optimal answer. Encouraging people to free-form think without any sort of tie to actual performance does no-one any credit - the smart ones are already well ahead of the curve and the dumb ones think that they made a comment in class somehow made them insightful.
Classic example - I spent a semester discussing the Lord of the Flies, William Goulding in English class -- oh the metaphors (and no it wasn't voluntary), and when it came time to write my paper i looked up an interview with the author in which he *clearly* stated he had written the book with no metaphors in mind - it was just a story and the language was what he was comfortable in writing - there were no overarching themes etc. a semester wasted (though I liked the book). Same deal with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, oy vey! I would have much (*MUCH*) rather spent some time in *frank* discussion about the shit that matters; economic, military, engineering, science, and cultural histories. Those things matter 'cause they effect every-day events.
Books, and kill the TV/Computer/Game System/Music/Phone/DumbassFriends. Trap the buggers indoors with nothing but books. When I was a kid my field trip/day out was to the local library. They can always socialize later (when they're capable of holding down a paycheck for something better than waitressing/computer lab/{insert crappy job}).
...and when that child is only concerned about fucking? what then, mr.wizard? last I checked, hormonally speaking, kids are way more interested in the approval of their classmates & getting a girlfriend/boyfriend. Knowing about the war of 1812 or the gold standard hinders that, not helps it..... Hell, you can't even teach them *sex-ed* 'cause they're too uptight about it.
when they can:
a) read a book on the history of education at a college level,
b) analyze several sources and synthesize it into a cogent hypothesis
c) write an essay to explain what points support their theory,
d) get up in front of their class and defend their points in a debate
and
e) win.
then they can start being dealt with as humans and not chattel; until then the switch. its not complicated; some people are animals (and understand only pain) and others are people (who can be reasoned with) -- educated people need to speak both languages.. Thats in Machiovelli/ThePrince in case u were interested in a cite ;)
Lord. just bring back the switch and *real* tests, not this wimped crap. Poverty (dumb mothers who don't know any better than to work their womb) go a long way to perpetuating horrible students.
Detention, hand-cuff the bastards and then proceed to illustrate that probability theory e.g. the probability of you burning to death handcuffed to your desk increases the more time you spend in detention -- have them work out the probability and explain their models. correct answers get the key. :P
Sometimes, you just gotta lay down the law - like, hmmm, I know about six hundred different ways to kick your ass, and you know zilch. Perhaps I'll just beat your ass today and illustrate (by example) method #x. Sure the little bastards will turn out to be horrible parents but, guess what - their kids will be better students. The ones that live at any rate :)
Your part of the problem. I walked to school 30 minutes each way for years. I spent 2 hours (round trip) walking to my friends house. I spent six months walking (sans car) in cali, to and from work. whats your point wanker?
it's these two funny little things at the end, called feet - they're made for walking. an no offense, but really, "It is not unusual for schools to be isolated on the wrong side of major highways" would suggest you *BUILD A BRIDGE ACROSS IT* rather than buying (and maintaining) a fleet of buses to pick up kids *twice a day*.
wake up, your part of the problem.
kids are not dolls. they never were. parents are idiots. they weren't, but now they are. Welcome to your version of education.
Not on their skin color, on their ethnographic lines (established by voluntary disclosure during patient history, say) ;) People know where they came from (in 99% of the cases) - those that don't (ex-slaves + orphans) can establish general areas/relatives using genetic testing. And don't forget its not *all* genetics; environment has a lot to do with genotypic expression - classic example; a rare disease that was epidemic in Auschwitz, affecting children (ate their face off) - German doctors thought it might be genetic (e.g. Jews are inferior)given the rarity in Europe and the extreme (relatively speaking) prevalance in the camps. Turned out it was the malnutrition/septic conditions that were linked to the increased occurrence. Anyway I figure (given u're comments) that we see eye-to-eye on the subject :P :) only question is that of proper implementation while retaining privacy, non-eugenics, non-discriminatory crap from sneaking in. /me suggests you hand out a leaflet with the odds precalculated :P let the patient pick it out :) If you are predominantly ..... top diagnosis is X etc :) Sidesteps most of those issues + it involves the patient in his care.
Lord what part of it ain't personal dont you people understand :P :) I stated my *opinion* on a comment he made in passing about his wife. I'm sure she reads other Journals is competent etc. I'm also sure there's alot of idiotic doctors who *aren't* reading the right journals. and before you say anything else, keep in mind that *somebody* has to graduate at the bottom of their medical school class, and they *still* get to call themselves doctor. And who's to say that they are any more diligent in their work affairs than they were in their student affairs.
I prefer they get on PubMed and look up a paper from a peer-reviewed journal in their industry. And if there isn't one, they should get off their arse and write one (you know, advance the state of medicine by *gasp* actually analyzing their performance and writing a paper every now and then).
Best walking history is me :P I take an active interest in solving my health problems. Most other people are unfortunate in that they are neither capable of, interested in, or experienced enough to do likewise - and *those* are the ones that need doctors to take their history. Anyway, like I said it wasn't personal :) And my crack about the Europaen descent isn't really targeting Europaens - has to do with how medicine is treated strictly statistically, but most of the data is derived off of Europaen male population. Classic example - lactose intolerance -- here its an irritation, in Europe its considered a disorder. In other populations, it might be the norm e.g. disorders and their manifestations are inherently specific to populations, but the priority of treatment is not adjusted to consider the ethnographic lines a person comes from; especially when it comes to evaluating studies which are heavily drawn from one population to the exclusion of others, be it deliberate (as it used to be) or otherwise (money/expertise to conduct a study).
And before you say anything, keep in mind all the pharma's are doing there testing in India and China now ;) that tendency is most likely going to come back and bite you in the arse ;)
Anyway, its just a point of contention -- I ain't too happy with how medicine is practiced today and I took an opportunity to say so :P like i said it ain't personal :)
Technically, his comment regarding continuinity implying infinite regress *is* accurate; ;)
Newton considered this one of the fundamental flaws in his theory of fluxions (an ill-defined
smallest unit of change). A fact I also independently came to at the tender young age of 17
And when I went to my math professor and expressed my idea, he was very excited... Apparently its
not all that common for people to realize the gross assumptions in the systems they are taught.
As to Zeno's paradox; its not a *real* problem in that you're particularly sloppy about what you use
as your yardstick; translation: evaluation of distance (length) depends on the yard stick you use - overall
length is *not* scale-invariant. And hence, given a scale (a particular length ruler), I can cross the room
in X amounts of steps even though I aught not be able to. The question you should ask my friend is this:
given ruler A (measuring in angstroms) and ruler B (measuring in kilometers), would you cross the same room
in the same number of steps e.g. X_a = X_b ? and if this is not the case, then wouldn't you have to concur
that zeno's paradox does indeed have teeth, if not feeble ones at your particular scale? And in considering
your reply, do keep in mind that the trend in technology is to try to keep miniturizing everything....
Oh, and to the original asshole who started this, KEEP ON BEING AN ASSHOLE!!!!!!! just 'cause ignorant jackasses :)
run things by sheer dint of numbers and limitless stupidity don't mean you ain't right