You know, greenhouse gasses have also increased dramatically since citizens have been represented in government. Maybe we should do away with that, too.
I'm someone who does indeed believe the science behind global warming studies, but still it ought to be pointed out that the "since the Industrial Revolution" part is the scientists taking a bit of freedom with how they spin the results.
Some of the questions we ask in an interview: "Why would you use SSH instead of telnet?" "What is port 25?" "How do you reset the root password on a server when you don't know the current root password?" These are really basic questions,
What is the point of asking these kinds of facts-questions? If you can get the answers to these questions in a 5-minute interview, then you could also train an intelligent person on these items in 5 minutes.
If an interviewer were to ask me these questions, it would be obvious to me that I would learn very little in the position, and I would look elsewhere.
I'm not trying to rip on the position; just trying to tell you the perception I'd get, as it might help with your hiring woes.
I think that's a really interesting point about how the wasting of time really is active. If I hadn't commented in this discussion, I'd give you mod points.
I think you're missing the point of what we're talking about here (or at least what I am talking about). I'm not talking about getting students motivated to do their work. I'm talking about deciding what those students' work is. My question about homeschooling was whether those who are homeschooled receive any guidance. Surely you don't just happen to decide to learn arithmetic, algebra, geometry, trig, then calculus by accident, right? We have agreed that the (general) order makes sense given the bigger picture. How would a child with no guidence and having no idea about those later topics yet be able to come to the same conclusion?
Sure, there is an aspect of obedience. But there still has to be something to obey
Yeah, I suppose us homeschoolers are completely unable to learn anything because we can't place it into the "Big Picture".
I don't think we're talking about homeschooling (or, at least, what people typically mean by homeschooling). Are you saying you were homeschooled and were left completely to your own devices with no guidance?
One correction: teachers go through educator's education to learn how to tame a class of 30 unwilling kids to servility.
This is probably a big part of what early childhood education and maybe even middle childhood education majors learn. However, I know four early ed majors and, while I don't consider their classes "tough", they are definitely learning techniques for teaching. That said, I am a supporter of the old adage: Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
Re:The children will ask themselves
on
The Prodigy Puzzle
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
If a super smart kid can't figure out a project of their own, how smart are they?
If that's the logic we're using, why are they in school at all? If they can't develop their own lesson plans, how smart are they?
The point is: no matter how apt someone is, the ability to succeed at a task is limited by that person's experience. That's why we have teachers who have gone through the education system and then learned how to re-teach what they learned those 12 years. They can draw on that experience, plus direct teaching experience as their career continues.
To me it's a little like math classes: you never really know what you're doing in a class until you get two or three classes beyond it. Likewise, a child can't be expected to both learn material and piece it into the bigger picture, most of which has not been exposed yet.
You might think I'm taking your comment too far, and I probably am. My point is just that the child would benefit much more from guidance on those projects. After all, maybe the student projects were "REALLY REALLY stupid" because the students were never given a hint about what makes a good project.
There are multiple definitions. This is being used to mean he was confronted harshly, but I think the joke is assuming it's the second definition: sexual proposition. Sex at the cost of one tinfoil hat doesn't sound like a bad deal, until you realize the propositionor was placed there for the sole purpose of confiscating it!
I can't back it up because you didn't provide a source for that 1% stat you threw out. But, my suspicion is that it is the low end of the range. Otherwise, the DOT are morons.
After the 55mph speed limit was repealed, the number of miles driven increased substantially. Larger (and less efficient) vehicles also became more popular, as gasoline dropped to historically low prices in 1998 (after adjusting for inflation).
What is your point? Each of these is worsened by driving at a less efficient speed.
Do you think my 1,500lb escort should have the same speed limit as some guys 2 ton '88 Cadillac, or an H2? Should I be forced to drive at the same speed as a senile senior citizen?
Yes.
One of the biggest factors in determining the national speed limit for highways (for example) is rate of gasoline consumption. Cars are not efficient machines beyond around 55mph. That's why the move from a 55mph national speed limit to a 65mph national speed limit is still controversial. Some people say it has contributed largely to how volitile our gas prices are.
What about other circumstances where I sped up to avoid an accident, or to avoid further traffic congestion (as in moving into place to merge into an open spot rather than having 10 people brake behind you)?
Have you ever actually received a ticket for the former (the latter seems a little fishy and likely to cause problems in the other lane you are moving into)? I'm pretty sure law enforcement is aware of these situations, and I've never heard of anyone being ticketed for evasive maneuvers.
The thing is speeding is not actually the problem they need to solve, accidents are
In my mind, that is the least reason to stop speeding. The maximum speed on highways has a huge effect on gasoline consumption (and therefore its environmental effects) and (relatedly) energy prices. You can see this by looking at graphs of consumption before and after the speed limit in the US was raised from 55 to 65.
I will admit to skimming the second half of the article (I decided I should probably do some work), but it seems to consider only the individual costs and benefits, without concern for more social influences. For example, if people switched to hybrid, less gas would be consumed, and the price of gas would reduce. It also doesn't consider the effect of value retention if more people moved to hybrid (admittedly hard to tell). Battery replacement/disposal? Reduced environmental costs?
I mean, I realize that the focus on the article was "Should you buy a hybrid?", but, especially for the gas price point, I would have liked to see these as at least disclaimers (e.g., we assumed a gas price of $x/gal, but that would change if many people moved to hybrid, which would then change our conclusions).
Slashdot Mirror
Chapter 3 deals with what worries Microsoft the most - Linux.
Hey, you spelled 'Google' wrong.
You know, greenhouse gasses have also increased dramatically since citizens have been represented in government. Maybe we should do away with that, too.
I'm someone who does indeed believe the science behind global warming studies, but still it ought to be pointed out that the "since the Industrial Revolution" part is the scientists taking a bit of freedom with how they spin the results.
Some of the questions we ask in an interview: "Why would you use SSH instead of telnet?" "What is port 25?" "How do you reset the root password on a server when you don't know the current root password?" These are really basic questions,
What is the point of asking these kinds of facts-questions? If you can get the answers to these questions in a 5-minute interview, then you could also train an intelligent person on these items in 5 minutes.
If an interviewer were to ask me these questions, it would be obvious to me that I would learn very little in the position, and I would look elsewhere.
I'm not trying to rip on the position; just trying to tell you the perception I'd get, as it might help with your hiring woes.
I think that's a really interesting point about how the wasting of time really is active. If I hadn't commented in this discussion, I'd give you mod points.
I think you're missing the point of what we're talking about here (or at least what I am talking about). I'm not talking about getting students motivated to do their work. I'm talking about deciding what those students' work is. My question about homeschooling was whether those who are homeschooled receive any guidance. Surely you don't just happen to decide to learn arithmetic, algebra, geometry, trig, then calculus by accident, right? We have agreed that the (general) order makes sense given the bigger picture. How would a child with no guidence and having no idea about those later topics yet be able to come to the same conclusion?
Sure, there is an aspect of obedience. But there still has to be something to obey
Do you remember any of your Microsoft-funded lobotomy?
Yeah, I suppose us homeschoolers are completely unable to learn anything because we can't place it into the "Big Picture".
I don't think we're talking about homeschooling (or, at least, what people typically mean by homeschooling). Are you saying you were homeschooled and were left completely to your own devices with no guidance?
One correction: teachers go through educator's education to learn how to tame a class of 30 unwilling kids to servility.
This is probably a big part of what early childhood education and maybe even middle childhood education majors learn. However, I know four early ed majors and, while I don't consider their classes "tough", they are definitely learning techniques for teaching. That said, I am a supporter of the old adage: Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
If a super smart kid can't figure out a project of their own, how smart are they?
If that's the logic we're using, why are they in school at all? If they can't develop their own lesson plans, how smart are they?
The point is: no matter how apt someone is, the ability to succeed at a task is limited by that person's experience. That's why we have teachers who have gone through the education system and then learned how to re-teach what they learned those 12 years. They can draw on that experience, plus direct teaching experience as their career continues.
To me it's a little like math classes: you never really know what you're doing in a class until you get two or three classes beyond it. Likewise, a child can't be expected to both learn material and piece it into the bigger picture, most of which has not been exposed yet.
You might think I'm taking your comment too far, and I probably am. My point is just that the child would benefit much more from guidance on those projects. After all, maybe the student projects were "REALLY REALLY stupid" because the students were never given a hint about what makes a good project.
Once neglected, the NY Times reports that...
If you ask me, the Times asked for it with all that required registration crap.
I consider this further evidence that some people can't handle a free (virtual) market.
(well, as an Indian who happens to be vegetarian, I reserve the right to make such obviously ridiculous jokes)
Children, today we are going to learn how to change a -1, Troll comment to a +5, Funny comment.
There are multiple definitions. This is being used to mean he was confronted harshly, but I think the joke is assuming it's the second definition: sexual proposition. Sex at the cost of one tinfoil hat doesn't sound like a bad deal, until you realize the propositionor was placed there for the sole purpose of confiscating it!
I can't back it up because you didn't provide a source for that 1% stat you threw out. But, my suspicion is that it is the low end of the range. Otherwise, the DOT are morons.
US DOT estimates that -- at most -- the 55mph speed limit reduced consumption by 1%, which is statistically insignificant
It seems you have your own misphrases when it comes to statistics.
After the 55mph speed limit was repealed, the number of miles driven increased substantially. Larger (and less efficient) vehicles also became more popular, as gasoline dropped to historically low prices in 1998 (after adjusting for inflation).
What is your point? Each of these is worsened by driving at a less efficient speed.
The romans posed the question "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?"
Ah, yes. Cicero's famous anti-speeding oration of 71 BC. Loosely translated, I believe it means 'Who will quote me out-of-context?'
Do you think my 1,500lb escort should have the same speed limit as some guys 2 ton '88 Cadillac, or an H2? Should I be forced to drive at the same speed as a senile senior citizen?
Yes.
One of the biggest factors in determining the national speed limit for highways (for example) is rate of gasoline consumption. Cars are not efficient machines beyond around 55mph. That's why the move from a 55mph national speed limit to a 65mph national speed limit is still controversial. Some people say it has contributed largely to how volitile our gas prices are.
What about other circumstances where I sped up to avoid an accident, or to avoid further traffic congestion (as in moving into place to merge into an open spot rather than having 10 people brake behind you)?
Have you ever actually received a ticket for the former (the latter seems a little fishy and likely to cause problems in the other lane you are moving into)? I'm pretty sure law enforcement is aware of these situations, and I've never heard of anyone being ticketed for evasive maneuvers.
The thing is speeding is not actually the problem they need to solve, accidents are
In my mind, that is the least reason to stop speeding. The maximum speed on highways has a huge effect on gasoline consumption (and therefore its environmental effects) and (relatedly) energy prices. You can see this by looking at graphs of consumption before and after the speed limit in the US was raised from 55 to 65.
The code that Google tells you to insert into your page includes a function call to urchin tracker:
urchinTracker();
Most decent hour long shows (CSI, Rome, BSG) end up on torrent sites ripped from HDTV in either 350meg or 700meg.. the latter is just awsome to watch.
So you've heard, right?
I will admit to skimming the second half of the article (I decided I should probably do some work), but it seems to consider only the individual costs and benefits, without concern for more social influences. For example, if people switched to hybrid, less gas would be consumed, and the price of gas would reduce. It also doesn't consider the effect of value retention if more people moved to hybrid (admittedly hard to tell). Battery replacement/disposal? Reduced environmental costs? I mean, I realize that the focus on the article was "Should you buy a hybrid?", but, especially for the gas price point, I would have liked to see these as at least disclaimers (e.g., we assumed a gas price of $x/gal, but that would change if many people moved to hybrid, which would then change our conclusions).
I clicked on the link. It made me confused; it didn't make me laugh.
You cite Websters; I cite Nirvana:
Just because you're paranoid
Don't mean they're not after you
That's just what they want you to think.
Windows Live is a set of Internet-based personal services, such as e-mail, blogging and instant messaging.
It all makes sense now!