For sensitive things like typing in passwords to financial sites, a graphical authentication should be utilized wherein the user "types" with her mouse. But, as has been pointed out, there is no 100% safe protection.
I agree. I tried something that would betray understanding, such as "Why did Germany attack Russia?". Same result, barely any mention of WWII. All top google results, however, were relevant.
US Government Contracting: Selling useless crap to uninformed people for over 200 years
correction:
US Government: Shilling useless crap to clueless people for over 200 years Shilling isn't a verb
Not that I completely disagree...but these people do go somewhere. If you start with the assumption that the distribution of the talent is uniform across the marketplace, then the migration of talent from one shop to the next obviously doesn't change that.
Increasing the economy everywhere by 10% is a good thing? That's like saying if only your dollar bill was worth $1.10. If everyone has more buying power, no one does. Look, this is really about competition. I get that everyone is starry-eyed about helping out Africa but please, before you respond to this again, think about what you're saying. Thanks.
It's not nitpicking. Evolution acts on deltas, not absolutes. I think this is the concept nearly everyone is missing. If you could, in theory, raise the collective level of technology the entire world one "point", you would accomplish absolutely nothing. Evolution is about competition. To try and change that is pointless because you're confined to this system. This may sound existential but I assure you it's not.
Actually, there have been documented cases where giving tractors to African tribes has effectively wiped them out. The result of the donation was that a generation of farmers became dependent on technology and forgot how to farm without it. Then the tractors broke down. Unintended consequences indeed. Personally I think the whole "giving people technology will improve their lives" theory is flawed or at least completely undemonstrated in any meaningful way.
I'm not talking about crazy alternative methods, I'm mostly talking about good teaching. It sounds like you're probably a good teacher, but I would say you're in the minority. By "linear" I guess I mean plodding and thoughtless. Let's say, for the sake of argument, you're from MIT. I've got numerous friends who would disagree that all the professors at your school are great at teaching math. They're probably great at research, getting grants, etc. But as a former student at a similar institution, I can tell you most of them are not good at teaching it. And of course hard word is the key. But then, that's true of everything.
I don't have a great answer for your question. However, for me the key to learning math was to stop being intimidated by it. I don't think they do a great job of teaching it in school where they take a very linear approach. They tell you about a concept (e.g. integration) and show you how to do it in certain situations, etc. If someone from the beginning had told me how to visualize what integration was, I think I would have gotten it immediately. Instead I was worried about writing down every little thing the teacher said. Having now gone through six years or so of advanced math, it's somewhat difficult for me to completely empathize, but I guess I would start with the basics. Wolfram, wikipedia, whatever are all fine resources for math. Start reading the simple stuff and if it's confusing, don't be afraid to move backwards and get even simpler. We all forget that stuff now and then.
Slashdot Mirror
With enemeies like that, who needs frames.
Like Alaska is just a frozen wasteland of tundra.
No apostrophe on Grammar Nazis.
For sensitive things like typing in passwords to financial sites, a graphical authentication should be utilized wherein the user "types" with her mouse. But, as has been pointed out, there is no 100% safe protection.
I agree. I tried something that would betray understanding, such as "Why did Germany attack Russia?". Same result, barely any mention of WWII. All top google results, however, were relevant.
good point
Well, I may mistaken but I think the LSM is owned by the British government ;)
but I've got money that says the government owns it.
Thank you. I love when I have to read through comments to get a concise explanation of the problem.
Well you can't very well build a giant steel planet with an energy weapon capable of destroying other planets in a warehouse.
Not that I completely disagree...but these people do go somewhere. If you start with the assumption that the distribution of the talent is uniform across the marketplace, then the migration of talent from one shop to the next obviously doesn't change that.
Is an understatement
If you've never seen the movie, your ability to post on /. is hereby suspsended until you do.
Hear hearAlso, ironically, you used "then you" in your sig. Also, it's grammatically incorrect. And the punctuation is wrong.
So there's a possibility they are smarter than you.
Increasing the economy everywhere by 10% is a good thing? That's like saying if only your dollar bill was worth $1.10. If everyone has more buying power, no one does. Look, this is really about competition. I get that everyone is starry-eyed about helping out Africa but please, before you respond to this again, think about what you're saying. Thanks.
It's not nitpicking. Evolution acts on deltas, not absolutes. I think this is the concept nearly everyone is missing. If you could, in theory, raise the collective level of technology the entire world one "point", you would accomplish absolutely nothing. Evolution is about competition. To try and change that is pointless because you're confined to this system. This may sound existential but I assure you it's not.
Actually, there have been documented cases where giving tractors to African tribes has effectively wiped them out. The result of the donation was that a generation of farmers became dependent on technology and forgot how to farm without it. Then the tractors broke down. Unintended consequences indeed. Personally I think the whole "giving people technology will improve their lives" theory is flawed or at least completely undemonstrated in any meaningful way.
Yeah, that was my point
Yeah, other than the fact that computers suck at base-10 counting and are really really good at base-2 counting, you're absolutely right.
Internet, Voice, TV. All on one subpoena.
I'm not talking about crazy alternative methods, I'm mostly talking about good teaching. It sounds like you're probably a good teacher, but I would say you're in the minority. By "linear" I guess I mean plodding and thoughtless. Let's say, for the sake of argument, you're from MIT. I've got numerous friends who would disagree that all the professors at your school are great at teaching math. They're probably great at research, getting grants, etc. But as a former student at a similar institution, I can tell you most of them are not good at teaching it. And of course hard word is the key. But then, that's true of everything.
I don't have a great answer for your question. However, for me the key to learning math was to stop being intimidated by it. I don't think they do a great job of teaching it in school where they take a very linear approach. They tell you about a concept (e.g. integration) and show you how to do it in certain situations, etc. If someone from the beginning had told me how to visualize what integration was, I think I would have gotten it immediately. Instead I was worried about writing down every little thing the teacher said. Having now gone through six years or so of advanced math, it's somewhat difficult for me to completely empathize, but I guess I would start with the basics. Wolfram, wikipedia, whatever are all fine resources for math. Start reading the simple stuff and if it's confusing, don't be afraid to move backwards and get even simpler. We all forget that stuff now and then.
Uh, look, I think you may be getting a little obsessive about this now.
So raise your hand if you think that was a Russian water-tentacle.