The problem is not that our current teachers deserve to be paid more. The problem is that teachers are paid so little, nobody with a decent level of education is willing to do it. If teachers were paid a competitive salary, we'd have smarter teachers. Instead, what we get are a few great, passionate teachers who really want to be there; and the majority are education majors who ended up in that career path to avoid flunking out of college.
Pay teachers a competitive salary, and we'll have more smart teachers. Education departments around the country will be able to base students' grades on something other than attendance (true story: you can't fail an education course if you show up more than 3 times in a semester), and the quality of education will go up.
Not overnight, and not even in 5 years. It takes about 20 years to turn around the education system in a country -- you need to raise an entire generation on good education before you can expect a graduating class full of good educators. The problem with today's society is that we've gotten used to immediate results, and foolishly expect them in every aspect of our lives.
Yup. I got fed up with fixing my wife's computer, so I put Ubuntu on it. She *hates* computers and administration thereof. The only thing she's asked me to do since then is how to install software (and recommend various things).
Back to topic, I bought a new laptop this weekend. Took my ubuntu boot cd into BigBox(TM) and booted a couple of sub-$500 machines. They both worked perfectly, so I bought the more powerful of the two. Came home, installed linux. Never booted to windows. Guess what, no bloatware! And all the hardware works flawlessly. I'm *SO* happy with this. In the 90's, I spent days searching for linux compatible hardware that I could afford, and then another day or two tinkering to get the system working.
You don't know your math history. Wiles' proof of FLT took about a year to verify and repair. It took a number of years before a plausibly verifiable proof of the four color theorem was published. Perelman's dozen-page proof of the Poincare conjecture was so lacking in details that it was fleshed out to over 300 pages. History shows that proofs of hard theorems are not easy to verify, and definitely not "very easy".
Even if the proof is constructive and is provably guaranteed to run in (say) cubic time, it needn't be so simple as a triple-nested for-loop. It could quite likely bear many similarities to exponential algorithms, but exploit a subtle property that just so happens to be bounded by a polynomial in the size of the input.
Traditional usage of the one-time-pad is to bring a book of pads. When you write back home, you use a pad and send the encrypted message over any channel available. When home writes back, they encrypt their messages with pads that you've got with you. When you finish using either, you burn the page that the pad was on.
The pad is never transmitted. The agent receives the pad book directly from the person they wish to communicate with, and absolutely nobody else is allowed near the twin.
Don't attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. The phones are clogged with malware within 30 seconds of booting, and immediately start blasting out spam and attempting to infect other phones.
I guess I should point out, I didn't design the backend. I was hired after my boss got tired of hiring the cheapest contractors he could find, often from countries he couldn't locate on a map. Not to say that I was qualified when I was hired, but I was much savvier by the time I got around to fixing it.
This reminds me of my favorite n00b mistake as a web dev. Our admin backend had a bunch of clickable "delete" links for frontpage content. No verification, no "undo", just a naked delete. Whenever my boss would go to futz with the site, Alexa ran through and deleted every single item as they spidered each webpage he viewed. I never could get him to stop using our admin page with the Alexa widget (despite this happening twice and me upbraiding him for it both times), which prompted me to finally take time away from putting out other fires and redo the backend with security as a primary objective.
No, it means y'all need to read the fucking patent. It doesn't patent anything going on in the browser. It patents the feature in Google search where it alters the document to highlight certain words, and then pass that modified document back to the client.
So... I'm as annoyed with Google as the next guy. Or probably more annoyed, because I'm a privacy nut. But... you don't have to use their gadgets. I use gmail, and the search bar in my browser. Of the dozen or so times that I've gone to the Google front page in the last 5 years, it was by accident, or because I wanted to play the little PacMan widget.
Thanks to NoScript, I don't even get the instant search results!
The insert key is useful for typing over text. Am I the only person who uses this? It's faster than backspacing over a sentence, if you're gonna write something else in its place.
Yes, I know that. I teach calculus. My response was to the notion that maybe Tai added something -- it doesn't appear that he did.
Moreover, given the choice of publishing a paper saying "this ancient result in math doubles accuracy" or "this awesome invention of mine doubles accuracy", some people will choose to take credit with the hopes that nobody notices. That's plagiarism. Since he probably had to take calculus to get into med school, my money's on plagiarism.
Nope. While I didn't find the PDF for this article, I read a few of the articles which cite "Tai's Model". One of them in particular, http://www.ajcn.org/content/89/4/1043.full.pdf, explicitly writes "Tai's Model" out,
1/2 x 30 x (y0min +2y30min + 2y60min + 2y90min + y120min)
This makes me think that Tai didn't "rediscover" anything, but brazenly plagiarized from a calculus textbook.
We've been pretty good about the whole "don't negotiate with terrorists" ideal. However, we should do one better, and "don't acknowledge terrorists". We flinch and whimper and crawl into a fetal position at the loss of a handful of lives, or, in the case of the 2009 christmas attempt, a few hairs on some idiot's scrotum.
Are you kidding? I think this thing looks awesome. I started out on an IBM keyboard with the 90dB click, requiring 20lbs of force to depress the keys. But something changed, and I found that I really like low-feedback keyboards. This is the ultimate low-feedback keyboard. But that's just the keyboard!
As others have no doubt pointed out, this is gonna make an awesome book reader -- but the size of a magazine! Ok, if your girly arms can't take the weight, that's a valid complaint. But I'm a rock climber, and I don't mind carrying a laptop in my backpack wherever I go.
Moreover, the interface options are through the roof with this. As a programmer / mathematician, I'd love the extra real-estate for reference materials.
Granted, there still isn't good multi-touch support in Linux, so I probably won't buy one. But I'm excited nonetheless.
Oops, I was wrong. You didn't describe the greedy algorithm. You described an algorithm to compute a minimal spanning tree. Greedy algorithm would've optimized my example just fine.
Pinch at A. The vertices will hang in the order ABCD. Your algorithm gives an "optimal" route of weight 10000000000006. A drunken bee with a single wing would beat you there, choosing the path ABDC of weight 11.
Yup. The original proof of Banach-Tarski was a dead easy 3 liner. But nobody believed it, so they inflated it to a more respectable 30 pages. And then everybody was like, "WOW".
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is not that our current teachers deserve to be paid more. The problem is that teachers are paid so little, nobody with a decent level of education is willing to do it. If teachers were paid a competitive salary, we'd have smarter teachers. Instead, what we get are a few great, passionate teachers who really want to be there; and the majority are education majors who ended up in that career path to avoid flunking out of college.
Pay teachers a competitive salary, and we'll have more smart teachers. Education departments around the country will be able to base students' grades on something other than attendance (true story: you can't fail an education course if you show up more than 3 times in a semester), and the quality of education will go up.
Not overnight, and not even in 5 years. It takes about 20 years to turn around the education system in a country -- you need to raise an entire generation on good education before you can expect a graduating class full of good educators. The problem with today's society is that we've gotten used to immediate results, and foolishly expect them in every aspect of our lives.
Yup. I got fed up with fixing my wife's computer, so I put Ubuntu on it. She *hates* computers and administration thereof. The only thing she's asked me to do since then is how to install software (and recommend various things).
Back to topic, I bought a new laptop this weekend. Took my ubuntu boot cd into BigBox(TM) and booted a couple of sub-$500 machines. They both worked perfectly, so I bought the more powerful of the two. Came home, installed linux. Never booted to windows. Guess what, no bloatware! And all the hardware works flawlessly. I'm *SO* happy with this. In the 90's, I spent days searching for linux compatible hardware that I could afford, and then another day or two tinkering to get the system working.
Big Government is a myth established by the "Republicans" to divert public funds to a very small number of very large corporations.
Just because our new president is black doesn't mean that he's any different from George Bush. That's racism, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
You don't know your math history. Wiles' proof of FLT took about a year to verify and repair. It took a number of years before a plausibly verifiable proof of the four color theorem was published. Perelman's dozen-page proof of the Poincare conjecture was so lacking in details that it was fleshed out to over 300 pages. History shows that proofs of hard theorems are not easy to verify, and definitely not "very easy". Even if the proof is constructive and is provably guaranteed to run in (say) cubic time, it needn't be so simple as a triple-nested for-loop. It could quite likely bear many similarities to exponential algorithms, but exploit a subtle property that just so happens to be bounded by a polynomial in the size of the input.
However, factoring is in NP, not NP-hard: both multiplication and verification of primality take polynomial time.
Traditional usage of the one-time-pad is to bring a book of pads. When you write back home, you use a pad and send the encrypted message over any channel available. When home writes back, they encrypt their messages with pads that you've got with you. When you finish using either, you burn the page that the pad was on. The pad is never transmitted. The agent receives the pad book directly from the person they wish to communicate with, and absolutely nobody else is allowed near the twin.
Don't attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. The phones are clogged with malware within 30 seconds of booting, and immediately start blasting out spam and attempting to infect other phones.
I guess I should point out, I didn't design the backend. I was hired after my boss got tired of hiring the cheapest contractors he could find, often from countries he couldn't locate on a map. Not to say that I was qualified when I was hired, but I was much savvier by the time I got around to fixing it.
This reminds me of my favorite n00b mistake as a web dev. Our admin backend had a bunch of clickable "delete" links for frontpage content. No verification, no "undo", just a naked delete. Whenever my boss would go to futz with the site, Alexa ran through and deleted every single item as they spidered each webpage he viewed. I never could get him to stop using our admin page with the Alexa widget (despite this happening twice and me upbraiding him for it both times), which prompted me to finally take time away from putting out other fires and redo the backend with security as a primary objective.
Look it up. It's a plural form of "you" that English otherwise lacks. And I might point out, you typed "Ugh."
No, it means y'all need to read the fucking patent. It doesn't patent anything going on in the browser. It patents the feature in Google search where it alters the document to highlight certain words, and then pass that modified document back to the client.
So... I'm as annoyed with Google as the next guy. Or probably more annoyed, because I'm a privacy nut. But... you don't have to use their gadgets. I use gmail, and the search bar in my browser. Of the dozen or so times that I've gone to the Google front page in the last 5 years, it was by accident, or because I wanted to play the little PacMan widget. Thanks to NoScript, I don't even get the instant search results!
Yeah, right. Like I want an advertising company to push content to me. Hasn't this been done before?
The insert key is useful for typing over text. Am I the only person who uses this? It's faster than backspacing over a sentence, if you're gonna write something else in its place.
Yes, I know that. I teach calculus. My response was to the notion that maybe Tai added something -- it doesn't appear that he did. Moreover, given the choice of publishing a paper saying "this ancient result in math doubles accuracy" or "this awesome invention of mine doubles accuracy", some people will choose to take credit with the hopes that nobody notices. That's plagiarism. Since he probably had to take calculus to get into med school, my money's on plagiarism.
1/2 x 30 x (y0min +2y30min + 2y60min + 2y90min + y120min)
This makes me think that Tai didn't "rediscover" anything, but brazenly plagiarized from a calculus textbook.
We've been pretty good about the whole "don't negotiate with terrorists" ideal. However, we should do one better, and "don't acknowledge terrorists". We flinch and whimper and crawl into a fetal position at the loss of a handful of lives, or, in the case of the 2009 christmas attempt, a few hairs on some idiot's scrotum.
Are you kidding? I think this thing looks awesome. I started out on an IBM keyboard with the 90dB click, requiring 20lbs of force to depress the keys. But something changed, and I found that I really like low-feedback keyboards. This is the ultimate low-feedback keyboard. But that's just the keyboard!
As others have no doubt pointed out, this is gonna make an awesome book reader -- but the size of a magazine! Ok, if your girly arms can't take the weight, that's a valid complaint. But I'm a rock climber, and I don't mind carrying a laptop in my backpack wherever I go.
Moreover, the interface options are through the roof with this. As a programmer / mathematician, I'd love the extra real-estate for reference materials.
Granted, there still isn't good multi-touch support in Linux, so I probably won't buy one. But I'm excited nonetheless.
No, it's a "freedom pat".
Oops, I was wrong. You didn't describe the greedy algorithm. You described an algorithm to compute a minimal spanning tree. Greedy algorithm would've optimized my example just fine.
Epic NP fail. You just described the classical greedy algorithm. Try that on the following:
A-B: 1
A-C: 2
A-D: 3
B-C: 10000000000000
B-D: 5
C-D: 5
Pinch at A. The vertices will hang in the order ABCD. Your algorithm gives an "optimal" route of weight 10000000000006. A drunken bee with a single wing would beat you there, choosing the path ABDC of weight 11.
Yup. The original proof of Banach-Tarski was a dead easy 3 liner. But nobody believed it, so they inflated it to a more respectable 30 pages. And then everybody was like, "WOW".
Wrong. Administrators / webmasters are people, too.
1) Reduced mass of the machine means more acceleration per unit force.
2) No sloppy derailleur -- geared bikes tend to jump gears when you push them too hard.