I taught high school Mathematics to students for seven years relying on chalkboard and transparencies for visual information. In the years afterward, I filled in an emergency to teach a C++ class to petroleum engineers, and the material was presented via PowerPoint slides. I did not prepare effectively to teach using PowerPoint slides - not enough time - and it showed. I have since seen other instructors teach using the slides. They are extremely effective, but you HAVE to spend the time training to use that form of visual presentation properly.
Well, that's not fair. If they claimed to UNDERSTAND the phenomenon, then your demands would be fair. I think they've been clear on saying merely, "The phenomenon indicate SOMETHING is going on. There's a correllation." Perhaps some of the more exuberant are claiming causality. As an illustration, THEY are saying "If you go outside and lie down on the grass without cover for six hours, and there aren't any clouds, you're going to be sunburned.", and therefore YOU are demanding, "I must be able to construct my own sun and lawn so that I can lie down for six hours whenever, wherever I want to, and demonstrate that I get sunburned, or I'm not going to listen to you anymore."
Well, go ahead. Make your own sun and lawn. Get back to us when you're done. (No cheating on the "sun" part, I'll give you a tiny little hint, it's gonna take you awhile, cause it's gonna be REALLY REALLY BIG! AND REALLY REALLY FAR AWAY.)
Now, once these people (bozos?) claim to understand WHY their experiments are indicating that light behaves as a wave AND as a particle, or that the continents seem to be doing some kind of drifting apart from each other; once they explain WHY, then you can laugh their explanations out of town - or prove em wrong! Until then, none of this is science, merely observation.
I am far more concerned about a state or national power corrupting a paperless electronic system than I am of a thug with a baseball bat lurking outside of my polling place demanding my receipt. At least the thugs can be fought.
No, you don't pull over (and you're not breaking the law). Assuming you're following the rules of the road, it's the driver *in front of you* who is going too slow - and impeding you - and the driver in front of him, and so on, and so on. During rush hour, brake n stop n go traffice, there is no passing lane. Doesn't apply. But if there are significant gaps ahead of you in the passing lane and YOU are the culprit, yes, you need to merge over into the slower lanes soon.
Perfect scenario that illustrates the rules of the road. You pull over at your convenience to let him pass you. Doesn't matter if he's speeding or not, doesn't matter if you're speeding or not. If "your convenience" takes longer than, say, 30 seconds, you brake and merge into the slower traffic and you LET HIM PASS. Otherwise you should keep off the road.
Who's worse, the out of control speeder or the "I'm driving the speed limit so I OWN the left lane, I'm a traffic cop mamma, look at me, look at me, look at me!" asshole? Well, yeah, the out of control speeder... but it's close. You're both a danger to the rest of us and often induce justified road rage.
The government views the loss of information, and the loss of the use of the computer itself, in a manner similar to a property crime. When my car was broken into and the cd player and airbag stolen - along with massive surrounding damage to the car itself - the police were scarcely interested. You file a report for insurance purposes, and that's it. Similarly, when a box of checks was stolen from the mailbox (stupid! stupid!) years ago, only businesses that cashed the checks could pursue complaints legally, even after the culprits were caught with the checks - never mind the hours and hours over two years it took me to repair the mess to my record. Virus writers, and the damage they cause, I think are viewed in the same manner. They can perpetrate their destruction with little fear of consequences, unless the damage is too great to ignore. Human nature, I suppose, there being bigger fish to fry.
Slashdot Mirror
I taught high school Mathematics to students for seven years relying on chalkboard and transparencies for visual information. In the years afterward, I filled in an emergency to teach a C++ class to petroleum engineers, and the material was presented via PowerPoint slides. I did not prepare effectively to teach using PowerPoint slides - not enough time - and it showed. I have since seen other instructors teach using the slides. They are extremely effective, but you HAVE to spend the time training to use that form of visual presentation properly.
Well, that's not fair. If they claimed to UNDERSTAND the phenomenon, then your demands would be fair. I think they've been clear on saying merely, "The phenomenon indicate SOMETHING is going on. There's a correllation." Perhaps some of the more exuberant are claiming causality. As an illustration, THEY are saying "If you go outside and lie down on the grass without cover for six hours, and there aren't any clouds, you're going to be sunburned.", and therefore YOU are demanding, "I must be able to construct my own sun and lawn so that I can lie down for six hours whenever, wherever I want to, and demonstrate that I get sunburned, or I'm not going to listen to you anymore."
Well, go ahead. Make your own sun and lawn. Get back to us when you're done. (No cheating on the "sun" part, I'll give you a tiny little hint, it's gonna take you awhile, cause it's gonna be REALLY REALLY BIG! AND REALLY REALLY FAR AWAY.)
Now, once these people (bozos?) claim to understand WHY their experiments are indicating that light behaves as a wave AND as a particle, or that the continents seem to be doing some kind of drifting apart from each other; once they explain WHY, then you can laugh their explanations out of town - or prove em wrong! Until then, none of this is science, merely observation.
I am far more concerned about a state or national power corrupting a paperless electronic system than I am of a thug with a baseball bat lurking outside of my polling place demanding my receipt. At least the thugs can be fought.
No, you don't pull over (and you're not breaking the law). Assuming you're following the rules of the road, it's the driver *in front of you* who is going too slow - and impeding you - and the driver in front of him, and so on, and so on. During rush hour, brake n stop n go traffice, there is no passing lane. Doesn't apply. But if there are significant gaps ahead of you in the passing lane and YOU are the culprit, yes, you need to merge over into the slower lanes soon.
Perfect scenario that illustrates the rules of the road. You pull over at your convenience to let him pass you. Doesn't matter if he's speeding or not, doesn't matter if you're speeding or not. If "your convenience" takes longer than, say, 30 seconds, you brake and merge into the slower traffic and you LET HIM PASS. Otherwise you should keep off the road. Who's worse, the out of control speeder or the "I'm driving the speed limit so I OWN the left lane, I'm a traffic cop mamma, look at me, look at me, look at me!" asshole? Well, yeah, the out of control speeder... but it's close. You're both a danger to the rest of us and often induce justified road rage.
The government views the loss of information, and the loss of the use of the computer itself, in a manner similar to a property crime. When my car was broken into and the cd player and airbag stolen - along with massive surrounding damage to the car itself - the police were scarcely interested. You file a report for insurance purposes, and that's it. Similarly, when a box of checks was stolen from the mailbox (stupid! stupid!) years ago, only businesses that cashed the checks could pursue complaints legally, even after the culprits were caught with the checks - never mind the hours and hours over two years it took me to repair the mess to my record. Virus writers, and the damage they cause, I think are viewed in the same manner. They can perpetrate their destruction with little fear of consequences, unless the damage is too great to ignore. Human nature, I suppose, there being bigger fish to fry.