No. They were given pencils so that they could erase mistakes in their notebooks. BTW, if I remember correctly, they got four years of high-school electricity on the first day, electronics on the second. That's why bending down to pick up a pencil could be the equivalent of missing two weeks of school. Of course, I heard the story forty years or so ago, so the exact details might be wrong.
You may have been in academia too long if you think most jobs require a degree as anything more than a certificate saying someone could learn how to be a whatever.
For the most part, I've been out of acedementia for over forty years. (Programming school and some vocational training don't exactly count.) I have no degree, and a healthy skepticism about the real qualifications of those who do, after years of seeing people get accepted for various jobs simply because they've got those degrees, and then watching them failing miserably to do what their degree says they know how to do. (Yes, the majority of people with degrees know their subject, but I've run across enough that didn't to know it's not exactly automatic.)
Exactly. As I've pointed out elsewhere, using it to get better grades is only a short-term effect. If it doesn't also have the long-term effect of helping you retain what you learned, it's not going to be an advantage once you're out of school ind into the Real World.
The real reward is gaining the ability to get and keep a better job than you could get without the education. Good grades can help get you the job, but if you've forgotten everything you learned, how likely are you to keep it? Doing everything you can to get better grades, even if you forget the subject matter after you're done is good in the short term, but not in the long. Of course, few college students have ever understood the difference, and even fewer cared.
My father learned both electricity and electronics in the Army, back in WW II. Each student was given a large number of pencils because if you dropped one and took the time to pick it up, you missed two weeks. They were told that if they retained 10%, it was enough. He remembered most of what he learned right up until he passed away in his 80s. Maybe if you'd been force-fed it like he was you'd have remembered some of it.
I was a bio major in undergrad, I'm in a cell biology graduate program now.
I see: you're talking about academentia, where credentials are more important than ability. I'm talking about the Real World, where you actually need to know what you're being paid to do. Two different worlds, as you'll find out some day.
A better GPA will help you get the job, but it won't help you keep it if it turns out that by the time you graduate you've forgotten it all. And believe me, it will show. It reminds me of a friend I used to have: very good at bluffing his way into jobs he wasn't qualified for, and equally good at getting canned as soon as his skills (or lack of them) became clear. Once, he was hired to do tech support for an ISP, and didn't manage to make it all the way to lunch time on his first day of training. If that's all these drugs do for you, they're probably a waste of money. If, OTOH, you retain a good chunk of what you've soaked up, they're well worth the price.
I see what you're getting at; you don't want to admit that there is actually a lasting advantage to using a drug to help learn.
No. As I explained to another poster, I wanted to know if the advantage were long-term or short. And, as I've been out of school for longer than the average slashdotter's been alive, it's only a case of satisfying my curiosity.
I don't so much expect a difference as wonder if there is one. It occurred to me that the enhancers might have had an effect on the user's ability to shift things from short-term memory to long. Also, there's the possibility of state-dependent learning involved, so I asked.
Those people all ended up with better GPA's for it.
And how much did they retain a month later, would you think, compared with those who didn't? That's the real point of getting an education, you know, not just grades.
Yes, and back when I was in the Navy, we all had to watch a movie of crash sites before leaving Boot Camp. However, that was in a controlled environment, and the images were never released "into the wild," as they were here, and that's the difference IMO.
I don't want to see these photos, and the parents and family shouldn't ever have to see them either.
A friend of mine had to work crash sites when he was in the Air Force years ago. He was very careful to see that nothing like this ever happened to any of the photos he took. As he put it, "According to the First Amendment, the public has a right to know, but in these cases, they have no need to know." If those two stupid fools had realized this simple fact, none of this would be happening.
That judge should be recalled for that. (And yes, here on the Left Coast you can recall a judge that proves themselves unfit for the position.) The reason I say this is because this is a civil suit, not a criminal case. No law needs to have been broken for it to proceed. As an example, in the USA, you can say whatever you want about whoever you want and not go to jail for it. Of course, if you knowingly spread falsehoods about somebody, you may be sued for slander, but again, that's a civil case, not a criminal one.
That's what you get when you use a free hosting service; after all, they have to get their revenue from somewhere. However, if you're willing to spend a little money, take a look at the service mentioned in my.sig. It's worked fine for me for several years now, as well as a number of my friends. YMMV, of course.
MOD PARENT UP!!! I'm sick of conservatives rewriting history.
When it comes to Reagan, the liberals are just as bad. They constantly refuse to admit that the economy was booming under him, and pretend that he was already suffering from Alzheimer's when he was President, long before the first symptoms showed up. I don't know about you, but I remember the Reagan years, very well, and for the most part, they were very good years indeed, far better than that piss-poor excuse for a President Carter could ever have managed/
I've known Jerry for almost 30 years, long enough for him to consider me a friend. I even house sit for him when needed and take care of his dog, Sable. I'd not completely disagree with what you say, but in his defense, I don't honestly think he'd lie about what he's done. At the very least, he and Larry (who I've also known that long, although not as well) believe that what they did back then was as important as he now claims.
I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but you're exactly right. How do I know? Well, I happen to know the chairman of the citizen's advisory committee that worked out the idea, and the man who's house was used for the meetings.
Ronnie promised us that SDI would make nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete". I think he didn't quite understand how hard that is.
Oh, I don't know; I'm pretty sure he did. You see, the whole idea of SDI was to start something very expensive that Just Might Work. That meant that the Soviets had to try to copy us, and the effort caused their rickety, barely-functional economy to collapse, bringing down the whole Soviet Union with it. And that, my friend, was the whole point of the exercise: fight the Cold War on economic grounds, where we could easily out do them rather than on military grounds where we were stuck in a stalemate.
Slashdot Mirror
No. They were given pencils so that they could erase mistakes in their notebooks. BTW, if I remember correctly, they got four years of high-school electricity on the first day, electronics on the second. That's why bending down to pick up a pencil could be the equivalent of missing two weeks of school. Of course, I heard the story forty years or so ago, so the exact details might be wrong.
For the most part, I've been out of acedementia for over forty years. (Programming school and some vocational training don't exactly count.) I have no degree, and a healthy skepticism about the real qualifications of those who do, after years of seeing people get accepted for various jobs simply because they've got those degrees, and then watching them failing miserably to do what their degree says they know how to do. (Yes, the majority of people with degrees know their subject, but I've run across enough that didn't to know it's not exactly automatic.)
Exactly. As I've pointed out elsewhere, using it to get better grades is only a short-term effect. If it doesn't also have the long-term effect of helping you retain what you learned, it's not going to be an advantage once you're out of school ind into the Real World.
The real reward is gaining the ability to get and keep a better job than you could get without the education. Good grades can help get you the job, but if you've forgotten everything you learned, how likely are you to keep it? Doing everything you can to get better grades, even if you forget the subject matter after you're done is good in the short term, but not in the long. Of course, few college students have ever understood the difference, and even fewer cared.
My father learned both electricity and electronics in the Army, back in WW II. Each student was given a large number of pencils because if you dropped one and took the time to pick it up, you missed two weeks. They were told that if they retained 10%, it was enough. He remembered most of what he learned right up until he passed away in his 80s. Maybe if you'd been force-fed it like he was you'd have remembered some of it.
I see: you're talking about academentia, where credentials are more important than ability. I'm talking about the Real World, where you actually need to know what you're being paid to do. Two different worlds, as you'll find out some day.
A better GPA will help you get the job, but it won't help you keep it if it turns out that by the time you graduate you've forgotten it all. And believe me, it will show. It reminds me of a friend I used to have: very good at bluffing his way into jobs he wasn't qualified for, and equally good at getting canned as soon as his skills (or lack of them) became clear. Once, he was hired to do tech support for an ISP, and didn't manage to make it all the way to lunch time on his first day of training. If that's all these drugs do for you, they're probably a waste of money. If, OTOH, you retain a good chunk of what you've soaked up, they're well worth the price.
Yes, I'm sure it does. What I want to know, however, is that long-term, or only short?
No. As I explained to another poster, I wanted to know if the advantage were long-term or short. And, as I've been out of school for longer than the average slashdotter's been alive, it's only a case of satisfying my curiosity.
I don't so much expect a difference as wonder if there is one. It occurred to me that the enhancers might have had an effect on the user's ability to shift things from short-term memory to long. Also, there's the possibility of state-dependent learning involved, so I asked.
The best neuroenhancer the world will ever see is obecalp. Remember, boys and girls, obecalp is placebo spelled backwards!
And how much did they retain a month later, would you think, compared with those who didn't? That's the real point of getting an education, you know, not just grades.
While you're at it, take a good look at Landslide Lindon. Not exactly what you'd call a movie star, was he?
Yes, and back when I was in the Navy, we all had to watch a movie of crash sites before leaving Boot Camp. However, that was in a controlled environment, and the images were never released "into the wild," as they were here, and that's the difference IMO.
A friend of mine had to work crash sites when he was in the Air Force years ago. He was very careful to see that nothing like this ever happened to any of the photos he took. As he put it, "According to the First Amendment, the public has a right to know, but in these cases, they have no need to know." If those two stupid fools had realized this simple fact, none of this would be happening.
That judge should be recalled for that. (And yes, here on the Left Coast you can recall a judge that proves themselves unfit for the position.) The reason I say this is because this is a civil suit, not a criminal case. No law needs to have been broken for it to proceed. As an example, in the USA, you can say whatever you want about whoever you want and not go to jail for it. Of course, if you knowingly spread falsehoods about somebody, you may be sued for slander, but again, that's a civil case, not a criminal one.
Depending on the time of year, you might also have been able to see the furthest object visible to the naked eye: the Andromeda Galaxy, 2.5 MLY away.
Yes, especially when you consider how many FOSS programs there are out there to do exactly that.
That's what you get when you use a free hosting service; after all, they have to get their revenue from somewhere. However, if you're willing to spend a little money, take a look at the service mentioned in my .sig. It's worked fine for me for several years now, as well as a number of my friends. YMMV, of course.
More likely, you're just using Adblock like most Slashdotters and never even see them.
When it comes to Reagan, the liberals are just as bad. They constantly refuse to admit that the economy was booming under him, and pretend that he was already suffering from Alzheimer's when he was President, long before the first symptoms showed up. I don't know about you, but I remember the Reagan years, very well, and for the most part, they were very good years indeed, far better than that piss-poor excuse for a President Carter could ever have managed/
I've known Jerry for almost 30 years, long enough for him to consider me a friend. I even house sit for him when needed and take care of his dog, Sable. I'd not completely disagree with what you say, but in his defense, I don't honestly think he'd lie about what he's done. At the very least, he and Larry (who I've also known that long, although not as well) believe that what they did back then was as important as he now claims.
I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but you're exactly right. How do I know? Well, I happen to know the chairman of the citizen's advisory committee that worked out the idea, and the man who's house was used for the meetings.
Oh, I don't know; I'm pretty sure he did. You see, the whole idea of SDI was to start something very expensive that Just Might Work. That meant that the Soviets had to try to copy us, and the effort caused their rickety, barely-functional economy to collapse, bringing down the whole Soviet Union with it. And that, my friend, was the whole point of the exercise: fight the Cold War on economic grounds, where we could easily out do them rather than on military grounds where we were stuck in a stalemate.
I try not to be a grammar/spelling nazi, but I thought you should know that you misspelled "audiophoole."