I'm starting to get a better understanding of our disagreement. NCLB does not actually make any effort to leave no children behind. The entire bill is designed solely to shut down failing schools by eliminating funding.
You really shouldn't listen to a teacher about it (apologies if she is your mother), because that would be like listening to a police officer's opinion of internal affairs. No one believes they should be held accountable for their performance, because they know that a lot of it is out of their hands.
But the fact is that there are some really shitty schools out there, and they have to be shut down. There are also some really shitty teachers out there, and sometimes closing down the school they work at is the only way to get rid of them (thank you teacher's unions).
I don't know about any of those other things you've said. I don't believe schools have ever been worth anything. They exist solely for the purpose of indoctrinating people while they are young so that they will willingly go along with a system and a culture that is obviously dysfunctional.
Do they automatically post this article every couple months? It seems like Nuclear has been on the verge of revival for a couple decades now. I doubt we will ever see it.
It sounds like you object to it because of it's name (because you want to leave some children behind) rather than it's content. The bill holds schools accountable for the performance of their students, with the goal being removing federal funding from failing schools (so that it can be given to schools that achieve results). It isn't a mandate specifically for the performance of individual students (though it's name implies that).
No Child Left Behind . . . is perhaps one of the stupidest pieces of legislation ever conceived
What makes you say that? I had some teacher friends who were complaining about it, and they said it was unfair to rate a teacher's performance by the performance of their students on a standardized test. And they complained that the testing was not a fair reflection of the quality of education received. I'm sorry, but when you make your living literally determining students futures by judging their performance with tests, you have no right to complain when you employer does the same to you. And you know what else? When you distribute a test over a hundred students, you are much more likely to get a accurate result then when you give a student a test individually, so in reality NCLB is much more fair to teachers than teachers are to their students.
And what's the alternative? Not tracking performance at all?! That is a recipe for failure.
That reminds me of my 8th grade algebra teacher, Ms. Thomas. She established the class based on memorization and required her students to complete hundreds of nearly identical problems on a daily basis. It was horrible, I couldn't learn anything. So I asked my mom to request a different class for me.
Before I could leave I had to sit down with the Assistant Principal and the teacher to explain why I wanted to transfer. Ultimately they told me that I was hurting her feelings for wanting to leave and that I would be better off sticking through it because I would learn more. I was just an eight grader, what was I supposed to say to them? I gave up on leaving. Then I failed the class. Schools are run by a bunch of idiots who don't know what they're doing, and don't (as far as I can tell) care about their students. Fuck'em.
I work with databases a lot, and while I've read books on design, I don't think it's complex with a relational database since most of the design has already been done for you. The guiding principles I follow are simple:
1) Don't over-complicate your database. Only store data that you plan on using or you need to store, stay away from adding unnecessary tables or data. Don't try to build a fancy user interface with lots of code unless you expect the database to be used by a layperson, and only build such interfaces with a specific scope in mind. If the user wants to do something more complex, let them come to you. A knowledgeable user should be able to understand and use your database without an interface. If they can't you've probably done something wrong.
2) Don't abbreviate your field names. A modern relational database can handle spaces and long names. But a modern user still can not guess what your abbreviation meant. Yes, it makes the code a little longer, but you're better off in the end.
3) Don't use an arbitrary primary key unless you have a good reason to. If you are storing data that is meaningful, it will also be unique, so you may be able to find one or two fields that can serve as a primary key on their own. This makes it easier for people to navigate/maintain/update the database later on because it keeps the number of fields down.
4) Don't store data in more than one place, that way if you need to update it you only have to change it once.
5) Lock down your data. Have a good idea about all the possible data and potential field values and don't let people enter data that your database isn't designed to handle. If there's a field with a finite number of possible entries, store those possible values in a separate table and require the field to draw it's value from that table.
You could store all your images in a vector format and then have the screen rasterize it prior to display (the same way a printer does). Then you are only limited by the display resolution.
As a person who's moved to California, and now lives here, I can tell you that the only reason people move to California is the weather. Everything else is completely nuts. And the other poster is right, the only reason there's any money in California at all is the people moving here (seriously, we have no industry, and very little agriculture compared to the population). We work hard and pay a lot in rent an taxes to be here, so don't be ragging on us immigrants just because we see the state for what it really is.
If they couldn't write an accurate report the size of IPCC report, they should have written a smaller one. This report is a big deal, politicians are using as a guide for dramatic changes to the world's economy. I'm not saying it has to be perfect. But sloppiness and carelessness in unacceptable for something like this, and it is easy to keep the scope of a report small enough to ensure that every assertion made is accurate and meaningful.
Let me make sure I understand. The government of India is issuing unique identification cards to every citizen, which are required by law to buy and sell goods. And we're saying that these 3,000 or so Indians are crazy for not wanting to sign up for that? You don't need the Bible to know that's a bad idea. Has the entire world lost it's mind?
It's up to me how I respond to what you do, it is in my power to make my own choices. You have the power to make me feel pain, and I have the power to get upset about it and hit you back. But to say that it don't have the power not to is disrespectful. Indeed, I can decide how I will respond. I don't need to get angry (but I probably will if I want you to stop).
I don't think happiness is a worthwhile goal, because life is not complete without the full range of situations and emotions. People chasing happiness will never be satisfied. Amiable goals for me are peace, and harmony, and maturity. But you can't build those things by trying to make everyone happy all the time, because people's desires are insatiable. There are a lot of hard realities people have to deal with before they can be mature.
In other words, I think a person's happiness is his own business, and it's wrong to make it someone else's.
This is a theory. It's a hypothesis that can not be proven true of false. On a fundamental level the chemical reactions that are believed to dictate human behavior are also believed to be unpredictable (by present generally accepted theory).
All of the people I know well I can predict their actions and responses almost perfectly almost all of the time. I think I'm truly surprised by anybody only about once every month or two.
Unless you can actually predict what someone's going to do all the time, you can not control them. And that is the point. The sooner society comes to grips with this reality, the better off we will all be.
No, you don't have enough control to make someone angry, sad, or happy, because they're individuals not objects. You can affect someone's mood, but you don't make it and you can't control it. People can't trust society because society because society is not trustworthy, because it treats them like objects. The solution is not satisfying their urges, but allowing them to be free.
But a Judge who's professional opinion is that the First Amendment can and should put aside obviously has no respect for the law. Such a person is a hypocrite, and is not suitable for a position interpreting laws. Perhaps she should run for public office instead.
The problem with the "people need an outlet" argument is that it's fundamental disrespectful to the individual on a basic level. People are not simply a collection of insatiable urges that must be controlled or managed or released. Viewing people that way objectifies them whether you think their urges should be controlled or satisfied.
In reality it is always wrong to view people as objects. We need to accept people as willful individuals who cannot be controlled or satisfied. Until we can recognize this, all our efforts to help will be in vain.
The problem with making a wide pipe is that it would need to be very thick in order to sustain the pressure difference between a mile high column of oil and a mile high column of water. It would be too heavy to put in place as a result. Also, it's not likely to solve the hydrate problem, since the hydrate crystals would still build up on the inner surface of the pipe. They solved the hydrate problem by preventing seawater to enter the recovery system. A large containment dome would sill allow seawater in.
They have been proceeding cautiously to avoid making the situation worse. Their next step is to remove the pipe at the flange above the BOP and bolt a new pipe in-place, but they're been waiting to see if that will be necessary first. I don't think welding anything is a good idea at this point.
I know that BP has a worse safety record than other drillers, but that doesn't mean their ROV operators are less skilled. I'd like to see you (or anyone else) pull something like this off without making at least a couple mistakes.
Temperature difference is the driving factor in all heat transfer, including radiant heat transfer. If you agree with the theoretical approach (that all objects containing thermal energy are constantly giving off radiation) then you will notice that an object receives radiant energy from it's surroundings. If you are thinking about black body radiation, you can see that an object will reach equilibrium at the temperature of it's surroundings (at which point the radiation received will be equal to the radiation lost).
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I was at work. I can't just be typin' on slashdot all day long! Gimmie a break.
I'm starting to get a better understanding of our disagreement. NCLB does not actually make any effort to leave no children behind. The entire bill is designed solely to shut down failing schools by eliminating funding.
You really shouldn't listen to a teacher about it (apologies if she is your mother), because that would be like listening to a police officer's opinion of internal affairs. No one believes they should be held accountable for their performance, because they know that a lot of it is out of their hands.
But the fact is that there are some really shitty schools out there, and they have to be shut down. There are also some really shitty teachers out there, and sometimes closing down the school they work at is the only way to get rid of them (thank you teacher's unions).
I don't know about any of those other things you've said. I don't believe schools have ever been worth anything. They exist solely for the purpose of indoctrinating people while they are young so that they will willingly go along with a system and a culture that is obviously dysfunctional.
Do they automatically post this article every couple months? It seems like Nuclear has been on the verge of revival for a couple decades now. I doubt we will ever see it.
It sounds like you object to it because of it's name (because you want to leave some children behind) rather than it's content. The bill holds schools accountable for the performance of their students, with the goal being removing federal funding from failing schools (so that it can be given to schools that achieve results). It isn't a mandate specifically for the performance of individual students (though it's name implies that).
This is a really bad idea.
What makes you say that? I had some teacher friends who were complaining about it, and they said it was unfair to rate a teacher's performance by the performance of their students on a standardized test. And they complained that the testing was not a fair reflection of the quality of education received. I'm sorry, but when you make your living literally determining students futures by judging their performance with tests, you have no right to complain when you employer does the same to you. And you know what else? When you distribute a test over a hundred students, you are much more likely to get a accurate result then when you give a student a test individually, so in reality NCLB is much more fair to teachers than teachers are to their students.
And what's the alternative? Not tracking performance at all?! That is a recipe for failure.
That reminds me of my 8th grade algebra teacher, Ms. Thomas. She established the class based on memorization and required her students to complete hundreds of nearly identical problems on a daily basis. It was horrible, I couldn't learn anything. So I asked my mom to request a different class for me.
Before I could leave I had to sit down with the Assistant Principal and the teacher to explain why I wanted to transfer. Ultimately they told me that I was hurting her feelings for wanting to leave and that I would be better off sticking through it because I would learn more. I was just an eight grader, what was I supposed to say to them? I gave up on leaving. Then I failed the class. Schools are run by a bunch of idiots who don't know what they're doing, and don't (as far as I can tell) care about their students. Fuck'em.
I work with databases a lot, and while I've read books on design, I don't think it's complex with a relational database since most of the design has already been done for you. The guiding principles I follow are simple:
1) Don't over-complicate your database. Only store data that you plan on using or you need to store, stay away from adding unnecessary tables or data. Don't try to build a fancy user interface with lots of code unless you expect the database to be used by a layperson, and only build such interfaces with a specific scope in mind. If the user wants to do something more complex, let them come to you. A knowledgeable user should be able to understand and use your database without an interface. If they can't you've probably done something wrong.
2) Don't abbreviate your field names. A modern relational database can handle spaces and long names. But a modern user still can not guess what your abbreviation meant. Yes, it makes the code a little longer, but you're better off in the end.
3) Don't use an arbitrary primary key unless you have a good reason to. If you are storing data that is meaningful, it will also be unique, so you may be able to find one or two fields that can serve as a primary key on their own. This makes it easier for people to navigate/maintain/update the database later on because it keeps the number of fields down.
4) Don't store data in more than one place, that way if you need to update it you only have to change it once.
5) Lock down your data. Have a good idea about all the possible data and potential field values and don't let people enter data that your database isn't designed to handle. If there's a field with a finite number of possible entries, store those possible values in a separate table and require the field to draw it's value from that table.
You could store all your images in a vector format and then have the screen rasterize it prior to display (the same way a printer does). Then you are only limited by the display resolution.
As a person who's moved to California, and now lives here, I can tell you that the only reason people move to California is the weather. Everything else is completely nuts. And the other poster is right, the only reason there's any money in California at all is the people moving here (seriously, we have no industry, and very little agriculture compared to the population). We work hard and pay a lot in rent an taxes to be here, so don't be ragging on us immigrants just because we see the state for what it really is.
Why is this modded troll? I live in California, I can attest to the accuracy of the claim.
If they couldn't write an accurate report the size of IPCC report, they should have written a smaller one. This report is a big deal, politicians are using as a guide for dramatic changes to the world's economy. I'm not saying it has to be perfect. But sloppiness and carelessness in unacceptable for something like this, and it is easy to keep the scope of a report small enough to ensure that every assertion made is accurate and meaningful.
Don't you think that gives the government too much power?
Let me make sure I understand. The government of India is issuing unique identification cards to every citizen, which are required by law to buy and sell goods. And we're saying that these 3,000 or so Indians are crazy for not wanting to sign up for that? You don't need the Bible to know that's a bad idea. Has the entire world lost it's mind?
It's up to me how I respond to what you do, it is in my power to make my own choices. You have the power to make me feel pain, and I have the power to get upset about it and hit you back. But to say that it don't have the power not to is disrespectful. Indeed, I can decide how I will respond. I don't need to get angry (but I probably will if I want you to stop).
I don't think happiness is a worthwhile goal, because life is not complete without the full range of situations and emotions. People chasing happiness will never be satisfied. Amiable goals for me are peace, and harmony, and maturity. But you can't build those things by trying to make everyone happy all the time, because people's desires are insatiable. There are a lot of hard realities people have to deal with before they can be mature.
In other words, I think a person's happiness is his own business, and it's wrong to make it someone else's.
This is a theory. It's a hypothesis that can not be proven true of false. On a fundamental level the chemical reactions that are believed to dictate human behavior are also believed to be unpredictable (by present generally accepted theory).
Unless you can actually predict what someone's going to do all the time, you can not control them. And that is the point. The sooner society comes to grips with this reality, the better off we will all be.
No, you don't have enough control to make someone angry, sad, or happy, because they're individuals not objects. You can affect someone's mood, but you don't make it and you can't control it. People can't trust society because society because society is not trustworthy, because it treats them like objects. The solution is not satisfying their urges, but allowing them to be free.
But a Judge who's professional opinion is that the First Amendment can and should put aside obviously has no respect for the law. Such a person is a hypocrite, and is not suitable for a position interpreting laws. Perhaps she should run for public office instead.
The problem with the "people need an outlet" argument is that it's fundamental disrespectful to the individual on a basic level. People are not simply a collection of insatiable urges that must be controlled or managed or released. Viewing people that way objectifies them whether you think their urges should be controlled or satisfied.
In reality it is always wrong to view people as objects. We need to accept people as willful individuals who cannot be controlled or satisfied. Until we can recognize this, all our efforts to help will be in vain.
The problem with making a wide pipe is that it would need to be very thick in order to sustain the pressure difference between a mile high column of oil and a mile high column of water. It would be too heavy to put in place as a result. Also, it's not likely to solve the hydrate problem, since the hydrate crystals would still build up on the inner surface of the pipe. They solved the hydrate problem by preventing seawater to enter the recovery system. A large containment dome would sill allow seawater in.
They have been proceeding cautiously to avoid making the situation worse. Their next step is to remove the pipe at the flange above the BOP and bolt a new pipe in-place, but they're been waiting to see if that will be necessary first. I don't think welding anything is a good idea at this point.
I know that BP has a worse safety record than other drillers, but that doesn't mean their ROV operators are less skilled. I'd like to see you (or anyone else) pull something like this off without making at least a couple mistakes.
I will begin smoking immediately in preparation and celebration!
Temperature difference is the driving factor in all heat transfer, including radiant heat transfer. If you agree with the theoretical approach (that all objects containing thermal energy are constantly giving off radiation) then you will notice that an object receives radiant energy from it's surroundings. If you are thinking about black body radiation, you can see that an object will reach equilibrium at the temperature of it's surroundings (at which point the radiation received will be equal to the radiation lost).
That's fine, but he wasn't apologizing for them having to pay for damages. I'm sick of hearing people say that he was.