It's far less stringent. Sometimes it's how to use a spreadsheet without even using macros. No hex, binary, gates or even moving turtles about in LOGO.
As for me I'm wondering what is required as a qualification and whether it's excessively restrictive. Back in the 1980s any recent grad with a maths focus could teach the concepts behind CS to high school students as well as anyone. The idea, today as then, is not to TRAIN students in python, perl, logo, basic or the current state of dotnet but TEACH students the idea of getting computers to do what they are told. A single introductory university level CS subject should be plenty to give the teachers more than enough to cover high school level computing and know which direction to point the kids that want to go above and beyond the coursework. So I see it as not only an opportunity but possibly also a poorly defined problem. Maybe they already have people who can teach the level of CS required but are looking for some sort of certificate instead of ability. If you can teach kids calculus and physics then the ability to do a bit of boolean algebra and simple coding/scripting probably came with it.
And Buzz was so upset about that, he retaliated by supposedly 'forgetting' his own camera on the moon
With respect, they hadn't got a lot of sleep and they were a bit busy at the time. I don't think we need to make up some moon rage story to cover a very trivial mistake of losing one of many cameras. Buzz is still alive. Why not put the story to him?
There's a lot of those ssh brute force attacks going on at the moment, although they are trying usernames other than "root" and widely distributed so you get a couple of hundred machines taking turns of just a few attempts each so that it's harder to block. It's a problem a few years old with the recent twist being spreading out the attacks to avoid triggering "fail2ban" and other automated blocking measures.
All this does is remind me that MS couldn't even get a calendar to work with the Zune and with Azure and had both the device and the service fall over due to an assumption that every year is 365 days long. High school students would be marked with a fail if they made such a ridiculous mistake, so something was seriously wrong at MS to make such a mistake twice and not catch it before release or deployment.
Or somebody else capable of setting up a militia. It's there in plain English even if you want to pretend that in days of old no meant yes and people spoke in modern weasel instead of the language that everyone can read when they pick up something by Franklin, Jefferson etc.
but until you understand what "well regulated" in the time of the writing of the constitution means
I can read fucking Chaucer and understand it and you can too with a couple of days of effort. Everybody on the street who isn't a "we need guns to overthrow the government and the government has to let us have them" nut can understand that it means something like the National Guard, because it's in modern English, and you counter-revolutionary nuts understand it too but just pretend not to for your own convenience.
The reality is that a voting block of a handy bunch of extremists was available so the Republicans pandered to them and pretended to believe the extreme defacement of the Constitution they clustered around. I get that you've shat on the Constitution - just do not expect me to like it or or join you in the act.
So what keeps a bunch of males over 17 "well regulated" apart from some sort of organization? I don't know why you keep on pretending I mean the organization is government unless you don't understand what I've written so many times above. English? Do you speak it? Or are you just pretending not to so that you can ignore it when I point out flaws in your ridiculous argument. This is getting old, you don't believe this shit either and I'm sick of being treated as a gullible idiot. Even the people in politics are merely granting it lip service as the price of getting a large number of supporters.
This is exactly what I meant above about a diversion from reality. We both know this shit is not real yet you keep banging on about it and hope I'm stupid enough that I will fall for some linguistic weasel trick.
Agenda? An agenda of not wanting people so fucking idiotic about gun safety that they left a pistol in a state that a three year old fired it setting policy. I knew better than that at nine years old. See also the nanny state suggestions about guards in schools because the running gun clubs are too cowardly to act as if they are running gun clubs and do something about gun safety. They are an utter failure as sporting gun clubs go and wish to extend that failure to political influence by a very strained and disrespectful twist of the Constitution.
I also find it incredibly insulting that you keep on pushing this shit on me as if I am a gullible idiot when you don't even believe it yourself. It's a stupid game where the gun clubs pushes a cynical lie thinking they are fooling a political party and the political party pretends to be fooled so they can have extra numbers and extra funding. Nobody really believes this shit. Your attempted manipulation to swallow this shit that you don't even believe yourself and can only back up with twisted weasel words from NRA propaganda is very annoying.
I'm not objecting to widespread gun ownership. I'm objecting to cowardly pussies who insist they are "warriors" and need a "warrior gun" to make their penis feel longer or something.
The fun bit is when you tell them where the broom thing really came from and that a former monk that wrote the book on witchfinding, a "good Christian", thought it up. OK maybe not fun, because they may call you a pervert and call the cops to get you away from children. Either way they are scared of something so artificial that it's ridiculous, but what can you do? They are being manipulated by cynical experts.
Call a Republican country club lady "trailer trash" for an example of overreaction coming from all directions. In this case the magic ring objection and objection to a depiction of pregnancy is definitely coming from the "right".
It's also a reason to stop them using their judgement and defer to people in politics with little or nothing to base judgement on. No point blaming a person who cannot use common sense without risking their job instead of an authoritarian prick that's stopping them from doing what should be their job - blame them, the people who voted for them and those that didn't bother to vote at all. You may be a bigger part of the problem than school administrators. However, part of that falls down if the school administrators were never teachers so do not have the background to do their jobs effectively. That's one part of the US education system I've never understood, it's not a setting where an MBA is any use and someone with no classroom experience is unlikely to have much of a clue about how to run a school. It seems to me to be a symptom of incompetence to appoint school administrators who know little about schools or children.
You definition completely ignores the "well regulated" part, which clearly means something other than citizens with guns, clearly meaning a trained militia such as the original idea of the national guard. Inconvenient for cowards who want military weapons without military service and like to pretend that they are via some form of magical thinking a "militia" fully justified to have any form of ordinance. I don't get why you losers don't just be honest and say you want the stuff without weasel justifications about how it's your right. If enough people want something a democracy delivers so you can have lax gun laws without the lunatic word games and faux patriotism.
The above is a great example of how divorced from reality things get. When English doesn't do the trick the technique appears to be to speak in loophole weasel - attempting to redefine the English definition by pointing at very poorly drafted legislation. Hence the pi reference - yet another case of shifting goalposts from where everyone expects them to be to "win" an argument. Your redefinition makes no more sense than redefining the ratio of the circle to something that doesn't work. Also how can you call shambolic gun clubs that call for nanny state measures like expanding government to provide armed guards in schools (while simultaneously calling for small goverenment) "well regulated"? They can't find their ass with both elbows.
can you explain why it would magically disappear just because the material is being burned?
The heavy stuff goes in the bottom ash. The very light stuff goes in the fly ash. It doesn't "magically disappear", it just doesn't magically melt below it's melting point and end up with small drops of molten silicate blowing in the hot flue gasses. So the heavy stuff that doesn't melt falls out the bottom and we call it "bottom ash" in a lot of places. Is that making sense? For the next step with fly ash consider scrubbers and precipitators. After thinking along those lines enough to get some understanding then feel free to deliver a lecture about how I am mistaken. Please deliver it from your own understanding and not Alex Gabbard's deliberately misleading partisan bullshit. You do not have to think about it for very long to gain a better understanding than the article you have quoted.
Yes and PI is 3.11 by law as well. Try again. You also missed the "well regulated", and since gun clubs are opposed to regulation I'd be interested in how you weasel out of that one. I learned how to fire a rifle at nine but I see it as a tool and not a flag or penis substitute.
National Guard. Oh wait, that requires a chance of having to serve the country and maybe get shot at. Can't have that, it's too scary! What's a coward to do then apart from call their sporting club a "well regulated militia" even when it fucks up and adds to problems. Not "well regulated" and nothing at all like a dictionary calls a "militia".
considering most of the world at one point considered the ANC a violent terrorist organisation
The price of diplomatic deals with South Africa. I'm not sure how many actually believed it, especially since it was a time when US citizens were openly funding a real terrorist organisation in the form of the IRA. If the IRA wasn't bad enough then where did that put Mandella?
Ah, shooting the messenger time! Perhaps, but I didn't actually do the teaching myself or even meet the lecturer so no bullet for me. My point is that choice of language does not completely prevent poor habits. Spaghetti can be constructed even from languages with structures that discourage it. Whether that's from poor teaching or other causes I do not know, but there is some pretty bad code out there in a wide range of languages for whatever reason.
Slashdot Mirror
It's far less stringent. Sometimes it's how to use a spreadsheet without even using macros. No hex, binary, gates or even moving turtles about in LOGO.
As for me I'm wondering what is required as a qualification and whether it's excessively restrictive.
Back in the 1980s any recent grad with a maths focus could teach the concepts behind CS to high school students as well as anyone. The idea, today as then, is not to TRAIN students in python, perl, logo, basic or the current state of dotnet but TEACH students the idea of getting computers to do what they are told. A single introductory university level CS subject should be plenty to give the teachers more than enough to cover high school level computing and know which direction to point the kids that want to go above and beyond the coursework.
So I see it as not only an opportunity but possibly also a poorly defined problem. Maybe they already have people who can teach the level of CS required but are looking for some sort of certificate instead of ability. If you can teach kids calculus and physics then the ability to do a bit of boolean algebra and simple coding/scripting probably came with it.
With respect, they hadn't got a lot of sleep and they were a bit busy at the time. I don't think we need to make up some moon rage story to cover a very trivial mistake of losing one of many cameras.
Buzz is still alive. Why not put the story to him?
There's a lot of those ssh brute force attacks going on at the moment, although they are trying usernames other than "root" and widely distributed so you get a couple of hundred machines taking turns of just a few attempts each so that it's harder to block.
It's a problem a few years old with the recent twist being spreading out the attacks to avoid triggering "fail2ban" and other automated blocking measures.
All this does is remind me that MS couldn't even get a calendar to work with the Zune and with Azure and had both the device and the service fall over due to an assumption that every year is 365 days long.
High school students would be marked with a fail if they made such a ridiculous mistake, so something was seriously wrong at MS to make such a mistake twice and not catch it before release or deployment.
Or somebody else capable of setting up a militia.
It's there in plain English even if you want to pretend that in days of old no meant yes and people spoke in modern weasel instead of the language that everyone can read when they pick up something by Franklin, Jefferson etc.
I can read fucking Chaucer and understand it and you can too with a couple of days of effort. Everybody on the street who isn't a "we need guns to overthrow the government and the government has to let us have them" nut can understand that it means something like the National Guard, because it's in modern English, and you counter-revolutionary nuts understand it too but just pretend not to for your own convenience.
The reality is that a voting block of a handy bunch of extremists was available so the Republicans pandered to them and pretended to believe the extreme defacement of the Constitution they clustered around. I get that you've shat on the Constitution - just do not expect me to like it or or join you in the act.
So what keeps a bunch of males over 17 "well regulated" apart from some sort of organization? I don't know why you keep on pretending I mean the organization is government unless you don't understand what I've written so many times above. English? Do you speak it? Or are you just pretending not to so that you can ignore it when I point out flaws in your ridiculous argument.
This is getting old, you don't believe this shit either and I'm sick of being treated as a gullible idiot. Even the people in politics are merely granting it lip service as the price of getting a large number of supporters.
This is exactly what I meant above about a diversion from reality. We both know this shit is not real yet you keep banging on about it and hope I'm stupid enough that I will fall for some linguistic weasel trick.
Did you even read:
Agenda? An agenda of not wanting people so fucking idiotic about gun safety that they left a pistol in a state that a three year old fired it setting policy. I knew better than that at nine years old. See also the nanny state suggestions about guards in schools because the running gun clubs are too cowardly to act as if they are running gun clubs and do something about gun safety.
They are an utter failure as sporting gun clubs go and wish to extend that failure to political influence by a very strained and disrespectful twist of the Constitution.
I also find it incredibly insulting that you keep on pushing this shit on me as if I am a gullible idiot when you don't even believe it yourself. It's a stupid game where the gun clubs pushes a cynical lie thinking they are fooling a political party and the political party pretends to be fooled so they can have extra numbers and extra funding. Nobody really believes this shit. Your attempted manipulation to swallow this shit that you don't even believe yourself and can only back up with twisted weasel words from NRA propaganda is very annoying.
I'm not objecting to widespread gun ownership. I'm objecting to cowardly pussies who insist they are "warriors" and need a "warrior gun" to make their penis feel longer or something.
If not there would be no plot.
The fun bit is when you tell them where the broom thing really came from and that a former monk that wrote the book on witchfinding, a "good Christian", thought it up. OK maybe not fun, because they may call you a pervert and call the cops to get you away from children.
Either way they are scared of something so artificial that it's ridiculous, but what can you do? They are being manipulated by cynical experts.
Call a Republican country club lady "trailer trash" for an example of overreaction coming from all directions. In this case the magic ring objection and objection to a depiction of pregnancy is definitely coming from the "right".
It's also a reason to stop them using their judgement and defer to people in politics with little or nothing to base judgement on. No point blaming a person who cannot use common sense without risking their job instead of an authoritarian prick that's stopping them from doing what should be their job - blame them, the people who voted for them and those that didn't bother to vote at all. You may be a bigger part of the problem than school administrators.
However, part of that falls down if the school administrators were never teachers so do not have the background to do their jobs effectively. That's one part of the US education system I've never understood, it's not a setting where an MBA is any use and someone with no classroom experience is unlikely to have much of a clue about how to run a school. It seems to me to be a symptom of incompetence to appoint school administrators who know little about schools or children.
Wrong Draco.
No it's not Malfoy either.
You definition completely ignores the "well regulated" part, which clearly means something other than citizens with guns, clearly meaning a trained militia such as the original idea of the national guard.
Inconvenient for cowards who want military weapons without military service and like to pretend that they are via some form of magical thinking a "militia" fully justified to have any form of ordinance. I don't get why you losers don't just be honest and say you want the stuff without weasel justifications about how it's your right. If enough people want something a democracy delivers so you can have lax gun laws without the lunatic word games and faux patriotism.
Looks crystal clear - National Guard.
The above is a great example of how divorced from reality things get. When English doesn't do the trick the technique appears to be to speak in loophole weasel - attempting to redefine the English definition by pointing at very poorly drafted legislation.
Hence the pi reference - yet another case of shifting goalposts from where everyone expects them to be to "win" an argument. Your redefinition makes no more sense than redefining the ratio of the circle to something that doesn't work.
Also how can you call shambolic gun clubs that call for nanny state measures like expanding government to provide armed guards in schools (while simultaneously calling for small goverenment) "well regulated"? They can't find their ass with both elbows.
The heavy stuff goes in the bottom ash. The very light stuff goes in the fly ash. It doesn't "magically disappear", it just doesn't magically melt below it's melting point and end up with small drops of molten silicate blowing in the hot flue gasses. So the heavy stuff that doesn't melt falls out the bottom and we call it "bottom ash" in a lot of places.
Is that making sense?
For the next step with fly ash consider scrubbers and precipitators.
After thinking along those lines enough to get some understanding then feel free to deliver a lecture about how I am mistaken.
Please deliver it from your own understanding and not Alex Gabbard's deliberately misleading partisan bullshit. You do not have to think about it for very long to gain a better understanding than the article you have quoted.
Yes and PI is 3.11 by law as well. Try again.
You also missed the "well regulated", and since gun clubs are opposed to regulation I'd be interested in how you weasel out of that one.
I learned how to fire a rifle at nine but I see it as a tool and not a flag or penis substitute.
National Guard.
Oh wait, that requires a chance of having to serve the country and maybe get shot at. Can't have that, it's too scary! What's a coward to do then apart from call their sporting club a "well regulated militia" even when it fucks up and adds to problems. Not "well regulated" and nothing at all like a dictionary calls a "militia".
Which gun club propaganda do you wish me to read for the sake of re-education Comrade?
The price of diplomatic deals with South Africa. I'm not sure how many actually believed it, especially since it was a time when US citizens were openly funding a real terrorist organisation in the form of the IRA. If the IRA wasn't bad enough then where did that put Mandella?
Ah, shooting the messenger time! Perhaps, but I didn't actually do the teaching myself or even meet the lecturer so no bullet for me.
My point is that choice of language does not completely prevent poor habits. Spaghetti can be constructed even from languages with structures that discourage it. Whether that's from poor teaching or other causes I do not know, but there is some pretty bad code out there in a wide range of languages for whatever reason.