Sci-fi = Fantasy. There is no real distinction between magic and advanced technology.
Um, sure there is. There doesn't *have* to be -- it depends on how the "magic" is presented (Larry Niven's "the magic goes away", where "magic" is an naturally occurring energy source, Michael Moorcock's explanation in Elric that "spells" are merely making pacts with elemental creatures or reminding them of previous pacts) but "magic" as is usually depicted on the big or small screen is often of the more trivial kind -- the vain belief that ritual causes things to happen, which is pretty much the opposite of science fiction.
Good point. It isn't. I'd call it a softcore porn soap opera with swords. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
Now, it *might* have been. This is not Earth, and there are indications of higher levels of technology that existed in the past (architecture, if nothing else) but all that gets lost in who's screwing who (literally and figuratively).
Probably because of the high attrition rate. After seeing a few of your co-workers blasted to atoms, you might think about opening a coffee shop instead.
I think that to a large degree, the public's attitude towards education is "fire and forget", toss money and children at the system and assume that things happen. And they don't, necessarily. Our state school system is very top heavy, with most of the considerable budget going to "administration" and a small percentage actually getting to the classroom. The great majority of K-12 schools in this area are bureaucratic nightmares. There are a few, magnet schools, that seem to exist to provide a learning experience, not just soak up funds and provide an impenetrable barrier to parent involvement. But they are few and there is a long waiting list.
A family we know well had the opposite problem -- their kid was what the school system called a TAG student (talented and gifted) and she was not being challenged. The system acted like she was an annoyance. After trying to deal with the school system for a few years, her family finally pulled her out and put her in a private school where here gifts could be exercised.
I see I didn't really make this clear, but the counter to your point is that schools don't necessarily want parental involvement. We get in the way. We cost money, and we question the judgement of professionals. You can see where that might be a problem.
> There are successful public schools and there are poorly performing public schools. There are successful private schools and poorly performing private schools. On the surface, it would appear to be funding, and while a basica amount of funding is necessary, the real difference is parental involvement/interest.
Sort-of. I'm the father of a special needs kid, and I had to get involved early on at my daughter's school. I supplemented schooling with home tutoring, attended countless meetings, and pointed out issues like; while she is in IEP she is missing assignments in her regular classes, and her regular teacher is not keeping track of where she needs to catch up. In other words, the school was pulling her out of class, but continuing to make her accountable for assignments in the classes they made her miss, with no mechanism to find out what assignments those were. It was a fundamental flaw in their plan that they absolutely refused to recognize, until her teacher burst out (in the meeting with counselor, principal, and teacher) "How can I keep track of that? I don't know whether she's in class or not." The problem was never solved, and it was made abundantly clear to me that my input was not appreciated.
So, good luck making real change in the school system. It's possible, but you usually have to get a lot of parents and the media involved and publicly embarrass the school. And then, they respond by overreacting.
Let's say I'm a middle class earner, and a certain amount of my taxes goes to the public school system. I choose to put my kid in a private school, paying tuition for that, while also continuing to pay my taxes. There is now a prepaid seat in the public school that can be filled by another kid, or that funding could be used to improve the experience for the remaining students.
> If your local school stinks and you send your child there, Benedikt explains, 'I bet you are going to do everything within your power to make it better.'"
At which time, you find that your influence is exactly zero. (Speaking as a father of a special needs kid, who, after fighting with the school system for three years, finally and regretfully pulled his kid out.)
The school system don't cotton to no outside influences.
How many of our congresspeople, both state and federal, send their children to public schools?
I've often thought, were there a law requiring public officials to send their children to public schools, the school system would suddenly and remarkably have a much higher priority.
You know, I think you have something. I always thought a big part of Microsoft's business philosophy was that market share was market share, whether you got substantial new sales out of it or not. Maybe Apple is taking a page from that book.
Or, maybe Apple is taking a page from Google's book, and trying to create a market for cheap, non-boutique phones. Except, you know, from Apple.
Throw them away? - they don't want people buying "old" iThingies, do they, that reduces the market for new ones. How green is that.
Hopefully they could reassemble in America, slap them in those plasitic cases we have seen for the iPhone 5C...or whatever they call it, and market it in china or more likely they will just sell sell 2nd hand phones.
This is a worldwide issue - when budgets get tight, science and research programs are always the first to go, despite the fact that it's been shown that increased funds to research and basic technology development benefits the economy much more than financial investments, and even more than education programs.
...the first to go, and the survivors do so by following the money.
Well, of course. Even if for some reason the companys elected to stay, they'd naturally expect the government to build the structures using taxpayer money.
Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Oracle, LinkedIn, and Intuit need to snap to it, then. If they started now they could get it in place in a few years, before the seas come rushing in. They've got the funds. Money, meet mouth.
Far be it from me to argue with a famous astrophysicist and media personality, but I really think Tyson is wrong on this one.
Think of all the high risk (for the time) tasks that were done by private industry. Heavier than air flight, oil rigging and skyscrapers come to mind. There's probably a lot of other examples.
And most importantly, I think we're finding that space travel is expensive primarily because of the way governments do it. Having worked for a government contractor, I've seen first hand that our government has lost the ability to do anything at all at reasonable cost. To keep costs at reasonable (effective but not exorbitant) levels requires, I believe, the mind set that "I'm spending my own money on this", not "I'm spending someone else's money".
Nah, he's going to get booted and he successor will ditch Windows Phone.
Then he'll end up back at the mothership in Redmond as some other type of executive. Given how badly he's hurt Nokia, I wonder if the Microsoft board would really let him be CEO. They can afford someone good, why the hell would they choose Elop?
Dunno. Why the hell have they done most of the things they've done in the past few years?
Just have the students visit a call centre for any of the software companies (Microsoft, Oracle, et. al.). This will be their future if the study CS or IT or pretty much anything these days. Welcome to Hell, Resource CS230232932943291392/1.
But wouldn't that require having your passport up to date?
I think you're using a different definition of "cheap energy" than did I. It's a legitimate argument, (one that I would support) but not germain to H3 from the moon.
Slashdot Mirror
Sci-fi = Fantasy. There is no real distinction between magic and advanced technology.
Um, sure there is. There doesn't *have* to be -- it depends on how the "magic" is presented (Larry Niven's "the magic goes away", where "magic" is an naturally occurring energy source, Michael Moorcock's explanation in Elric that "spells" are merely making pacts with elemental creatures or reminding them of previous pacts) but "magic" as is usually depicted on the big or small screen is often of the more trivial kind -- the vain belief that ritual causes things to happen, which is pretty much the opposite of science fiction.
Good point. It isn't. I'd call it a softcore porn soap opera with swords. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
Now, it *might* have been. This is not Earth, and there are indications of higher levels of technology that existed in the past (architecture, if nothing else) but all that gets lost in who's screwing who (literally and figuratively).
Probably because of the high attrition rate. After seeing a few of your co-workers blasted to atoms, you might think about opening a coffee shop instead.
I think that to a large degree, the public's attitude towards education is "fire and forget", toss money and children at the system and assume that things happen. And they don't, necessarily. Our state school system is very top heavy, with most of the considerable budget going to "administration" and a small percentage actually getting to the classroom. The great majority of K-12 schools in this area are bureaucratic nightmares. There are a few, magnet schools, that seem to exist to provide a learning experience, not just soak up funds and provide an impenetrable barrier to parent involvement. But they are few and there is a long waiting list.
A family we know well had the opposite problem -- their kid was what the school system called a TAG student (talented and gifted) and she was not being challenged. The system acted like she was an annoyance. After trying to deal with the school system for a few years, her family finally pulled her out and put her in a private school where here gifts could be exercised.
I see I didn't really make this clear, but the counter to your point is that schools don't necessarily want parental involvement. We get in the way. We cost money, and we question the judgement of professionals. You can see where that might be a problem.
> There are successful public schools and there are poorly performing public schools. There are successful private schools and poorly performing private schools. On the surface, it would appear to be funding, and while a basica amount of funding is necessary, the real difference is parental involvement/interest.
Sort-of. I'm the father of a special needs kid, and I had to get involved early on at my daughter's school. I supplemented schooling with home tutoring, attended countless meetings, and pointed out issues like; while she is in IEP she is missing assignments in her regular classes, and her regular teacher is not keeping track of where she needs to catch up. In other words, the school was pulling her out of class, but continuing to make her accountable for assignments in the classes they made her miss, with no mechanism to find out what assignments those were. It was a fundamental flaw in their plan that they absolutely refused to recognize, until her teacher burst out (in the meeting with counselor, principal, and teacher) "How can I keep track of that? I don't know whether she's in class or not." The problem was never solved, and it was made abundantly clear to me that my input was not appreciated.
So, good luck making real change in the school system. It's possible, but you usually have to get a lot of parents and the media involved and publicly embarrass the school. And then, they respond by overreacting.
Let's say I'm a middle class earner, and a certain amount of my taxes goes to the public school system. I choose to put my kid in a private school, paying tuition for that, while also continuing to pay my taxes. There is now a prepaid seat in the public school that can be filled by another kid, or that funding could be used to improve the experience for the remaining students.
Remind me, again, how this is evil?
> If your local school stinks and you send your child there, Benedikt explains, 'I bet you are going to do everything within your power to make it better.'"
At which time, you find that your influence is exactly zero. (Speaking as a father of a special needs kid, who, after fighting with the school system for three years, finally and regretfully pulled his kid out.)
The school system don't cotton to no outside influences.
How many of our congresspeople, both state and federal, send their children to public schools?
I've often thought, were there a law requiring public officials to send their children to public schools, the school system would suddenly and remarkably have a much higher priority.
Someone has to change that planet's name ASAP.
Neil deGrasse Tyson are you listening?
It doesn't take an astrophysicist. Caelus is the roman equivalent, and less prone to bevis and butthead tag lines.
You know, I think you have something. I always thought a big part of Microsoft's business philosophy was that market share was market share, whether you got substantial new sales out of it or not. Maybe Apple is taking a page from that book.
Or, maybe Apple is taking a page from Google's book, and trying to create a market for cheap, non-boutique phones. Except, you know, from Apple.
Throw them away? - they don't want people buying "old" iThingies, do they, that reduces the market for new ones. How green is that.
Hopefully they could reassemble in America, slap them in those plasitic cases we have seen for the iPhone 5C...or whatever they call it, and market it in china or more likely they will just sell sell 2nd hand phones.
Maybe they *are* the iphone 5C...
Yeah, and if you could get them to us by this afternoon, that'd be great.
Of course they are. In fact the computers they're using are generating so much heat that... hey, wait a minute...
If I'm understanding what you're saying, it's true that a government could argue that building prison camps creates jobs.
This is a worldwide issue - when budgets get tight, science and research programs are always the first to go, despite the fact that it's been shown that increased funds to research and basic technology development benefits the economy much more than financial investments, and even more than education programs.
Well, of course. Even if for some reason the companys elected to stay, they'd naturally expect the government to build the structures using taxpayer money.
Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Oracle, LinkedIn, and Intuit need to snap to it, then. If they started now they could get it in place in a few years, before the seas come rushing in. They've got the funds. Money, meet mouth.
Far be it from me to argue with a famous astrophysicist and media personality, but I really think Tyson is wrong on this one.
Think of all the high risk (for the time) tasks that were done by private industry. Heavier than air flight, oil rigging and skyscrapers come to mind. There's probably a lot of other examples.
Yes, space is dangerous, but so are a lot of other things.
And most importantly, I think we're finding that space travel is expensive primarily because of the way governments do it. Having worked for a government contractor, I've seen first hand that our government has lost the ability to do anything at all at reasonable cost. To keep costs at reasonable (effective but not exorbitant) levels requires, I believe, the mind set that "I'm spending my own money on this", not "I'm spending someone else's money".
Elop is a moron. Why in the world would they put a moron in charge of Microsoft?
Why would that be any different than anything else they've done recently?
Nah, he's going to get booted and he successor will ditch Windows Phone.
Then he'll end up back at the mothership in Redmond as some other type of executive. Given how badly he's hurt Nokia, I wonder if the Microsoft board would really let him be CEO. They can afford someone good, why the hell would they choose Elop?
Dunno. Why the hell have they done most of the things they've done in the past few years?
Just have the students visit a call centre for any of the software companies (Microsoft, Oracle, et. al.). This will be their future if the study CS or IT or pretty much anything these days. Welcome to Hell, Resource CS230232932943291392/1.
But wouldn't that require having your passport up to date?
I think you're using a different definition of "cheap energy" than did I. It's a legitimate argument, (one that I would support) but not germain to H3 from the moon.
why should you care as likely you are now a temp / contractor and you will just get the OT / added job to fix there mess up.
Because I like to think I have a life, and I really don't want to put in another 30 hour day.
Too much access to large amounts of cheap energy would mean that we don't continue to buy it from current sources. We can't have that.