Good stuff. I'd like to add that students need to be taught to think and assess alternative claims in the context of the evidence. The Scientific Method should be introduced in grade school, not high school.
Of course, this problem is part of the larger issue of teacher qualification. The most glaring deficiency in our schools is not what kids are taught, but the credulity of those teaching them. I remember a science textbook in 5th grade, which stated that there were 5 basic types of animals: birds, mammals, reptiles, fish, and amphibians. To which I immediately asked, "What about bugs?" My teacher thought for a moment, then confidently replied, "Bugs are a kind of reptile."
I find this deeply disturbing, for a number of reasons. Most prominently, this seems to imply that one practical consequence of the recent Supreme Court ruling with respect to Grokster is a chilling effect on free speech. If one wants to create, one can't debate, and if one wants to debate, one can't create.
An addendum to my previous comment:
Also, it is notable that tech geeks probably use typewritten communication more than any other group that isn't self-selecting for English communication skills. That is, if you're writing in any other field besides tech, you're not going to get far if you can't write clearly, and you'll probably be forced to choose a different career path. In tech, communications clarity is a secondary concern compared to your ability to write logically.
I've always attributed this phenomenon to the same principle that dictates there are very few pretty girls who are also tech geeks. Imagine if you will, a Venn Diagram with two intersecting circles. One represents the population of tech geeks. The other represents the population of outstanding English communicators (or pretty girls). The intersection represents the population of tech geeks who are also outstanding communicators.
Assuming that there is no relationship between the two skills, one would expect that the intersection would be equivalent to the prevalence of tech geeks (X) times the prevalence of communicators (Y). As you can see, if one places any kind of standard of excellence upon either category, this is going to be a vanishingly small number.
In short, the average tech geek is probably no more skilled at English communication than the average American. And sadly, the average American is not very skilled at all.
Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. Eastasia has always been our only ally. Submit to Doublethink. Steve Jobs commands it.
Given that the company made about $86 million last year, the selling price ($1.9 billion) represents a price to earnings ratio of ~22...a bit on the high side, but not out of line with a company whose earnings more than doubled last year. Given that this is a profitable survivor acquiring another profitable survivor, I don't think this represents a slide back into the (good? bad?) old days of multi-billion dollar valuations for stocks that barely have a business plan.
As for that profitability, it may seem odd to those of us who take it for granted that a query like "prescription drugs canada" makes more sense than "Where can I buy prescription drugs in Canada?", but we're tech geeks. Ask around..."Jeeves" is the portal of choice for the techno-phobic middle-aged and elderly, who typically have a much higher money-to-brains ratio than computer geeks.
From the BatMax FAQ:
"11 - How could I test BatMax's performances myself ?
Proceed to a complete charge of your mobile phone (without BatMax).
Install BatMax on your mobile phone as described on the installation page.
Check the voltage and discharge time before installation (or see how much time - battery level). Record the results.
Measure complete discharging time at full charging condition (Discharge with a 3.8V, 0.5A bulb) or leave the mobile phone on.
Measure time (Continuous call is better to accelerate the test) until the mobile phone is out of power.
Repeat the test and measure the battery discharging time over 7 days.
If you have 2 identical batteries and mobile phones. Perform the test with the 2 batteries (w/ and w/o BatMax installed).
Measure each battery over 7 days and compare the results with and without BatMax installed."
Thus, the test performed was in keeping with the procedure described by BatMax, and should have produced similar results to those claimed by the BatMax Test Page (http://www.batmax.com/technology-test.php), which claims battery life increase of 38-47%.
This reminds me of a story I heard about an alien who came to earth and decided to take the contents of the earthling internet home with him, so converted all the data into one long integer, and expressed it as a fraction, then pulled out a rod of known length, carefully measured it, and cut it to the appropriate fractional proportion of the whole.
When asked how they were going to retrieve that information when he got home, he replied, "That's for the engineers to figure out."
Unless I'm missing something, isn't the formula for the cost to watch an episode once really easy? Take the total ad revenue per episode and divide it by the number of viewers, and you have the value of a viewer. For example, let's say that Battlestar Galactica draws 2 million viewers per episode, and sells ad time for $100,000 per minute, with 14 minutes of ad time per hour episode. The cost of watching an episode (ad-free, and neglecting bandwidth costs) on the web should be about $1,400,000/2,000,000 viewers, or 70 cents per viewing. So including bandwidth costs, $1 per episode sounds about right. Is there a flaw in my reasoning that I'm not seeing, or is it really this simple?
I think we're all jaded. This is a device that's big enough to archive the contents of every library in the world and we're complaining about the fact it won't fit in our front pocket.
Slashdot Mirror
Good stuff. I'd like to add that students need to be taught to think and assess alternative claims in the context of the evidence. The Scientific Method should be introduced in grade school, not high school. Of course, this problem is part of the larger issue of teacher qualification. The most glaring deficiency in our schools is not what kids are taught, but the credulity of those teaching them. I remember a science textbook in 5th grade, which stated that there were 5 basic types of animals: birds, mammals, reptiles, fish, and amphibians. To which I immediately asked, "What about bugs?" My teacher thought for a moment, then confidently replied, "Bugs are a kind of reptile."
I find this deeply disturbing, for a number of reasons. Most prominently, this seems to imply that one practical consequence of the recent Supreme Court ruling with respect to Grokster is a chilling effect on free speech. If one wants to create, one can't debate, and if one wants to debate, one can't create.
An addendum to my previous comment: Also, it is notable that tech geeks probably use typewritten communication more than any other group that isn't self-selecting for English communication skills. That is, if you're writing in any other field besides tech, you're not going to get far if you can't write clearly, and you'll probably be forced to choose a different career path. In tech, communications clarity is a secondary concern compared to your ability to write logically.
I've always attributed this phenomenon to the same principle that dictates there are very few pretty girls who are also tech geeks. Imagine if you will, a Venn Diagram with two intersecting circles. One represents the population of tech geeks. The other represents the population of outstanding English communicators (or pretty girls). The intersection represents the population of tech geeks who are also outstanding communicators.
Assuming that there is no relationship between the two skills, one would expect that the intersection would be equivalent to the prevalence of tech geeks (X) times the prevalence of communicators (Y). As you can see, if one places any kind of standard of excellence upon either category, this is going to be a vanishingly small number.
In short, the average tech geek is probably no more skilled at English communication than the average American. And sadly, the average American is not very skilled at all.
Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. Eastasia has always been our only ally. Submit to Doublethink. Steve Jobs commands it.
Given that the company made about $86 million last year, the selling price ($1.9 billion) represents a price to earnings ratio of ~22...a bit on the high side, but not out of line with a company whose earnings more than doubled last year. Given that this is a profitable survivor acquiring another profitable survivor, I don't think this represents a slide back into the (good? bad?) old days of multi-billion dollar valuations for stocks that barely have a business plan. As for that profitability, it may seem odd to those of us who take it for granted that a query like "prescription drugs canada" makes more sense than "Where can I buy prescription drugs in Canada?", but we're tech geeks. Ask around..."Jeeves" is the portal of choice for the techno-phobic middle-aged and elderly, who typically have a much higher money-to-brains ratio than computer geeks.
From the BatMax FAQ: "11 - How could I test BatMax's performances myself ? Proceed to a complete charge of your mobile phone (without BatMax). Install BatMax on your mobile phone as described on the installation page. Check the voltage and discharge time before installation (or see how much time - battery level). Record the results. Measure complete discharging time at full charging condition (Discharge with a 3.8V, 0.5A bulb) or leave the mobile phone on. Measure time (Continuous call is better to accelerate the test) until the mobile phone is out of power. Repeat the test and measure the battery discharging time over 7 days. If you have 2 identical batteries and mobile phones. Perform the test with the 2 batteries (w/ and w/o BatMax installed). Measure each battery over 7 days and compare the results with and without BatMax installed." Thus, the test performed was in keeping with the procedure described by BatMax, and should have produced similar results to those claimed by the BatMax Test Page (http://www.batmax.com/technology-test.php), which claims battery life increase of 38-47%.
This reminds me of a story I heard about an alien who came to earth and decided to take the contents of the earthling internet home with him, so converted all the data into one long integer, and expressed it as a fraction, then pulled out a rod of known length, carefully measured it, and cut it to the appropriate fractional proportion of the whole.
When asked how they were going to retrieve that information when he got home, he replied, "That's for the engineers to figure out."
Unless I'm missing something, isn't the formula for the cost to watch an episode once really easy? Take the total ad revenue per episode and divide it by the number of viewers, and you have the value of a viewer. For example, let's say that Battlestar Galactica draws 2 million viewers per episode, and sells ad time for $100,000 per minute, with 14 minutes of ad time per hour episode. The cost of watching an episode (ad-free, and neglecting bandwidth costs) on the web should be about $1,400,000/2,000,000 viewers, or 70 cents per viewing. So including bandwidth costs, $1 per episode sounds about right. Is there a flaw in my reasoning that I'm not seeing, or is it really this simple?
I think we're all jaded. This is a device that's big enough to archive the contents of every library in the world and we're complaining about the fact it won't fit in our front pocket.