I think having every resource at your finger tips during a test is a great idea. I also think the tests' quality should reflect your newfound power. The tests given in high schools, and even in many colleges, wouldn't work well with having the Internet and all it's resources available during the test.
Many tests are written specifically for one answer. Ex: "Who was the first president of the U.S.?" This is the type of question that will be quite easy to find the answer to. But asking multi-layed questions like "Who was the first president of the U.S., and how did he come about winning the presidency?"-- Not exactly genius level, but more suited to having a laptop at your desk.
For almost one year, I worked for the New York City Board of Education as a computer technician. In my short tenure at the BOE I had the extreme displeasure to witness the implementation of a filtering system called Netgear. Without question, filtering net access caused more problems than it solved. This was a city-wide rollout, so I'm talking about all of New York City here. Before the age of filtering (my first 4 months) I noticed that the children, for the most part, used the internet access available to them on a daily basis to send email to each other, search for Pokemon stories, participate in chats, help in their homework etc... and all was well. Enter Netgear- first filtering priority- NO email and NO web-based chat. In the following days, the Netgear administrators at Metrotech (BOE technology center) watched and logged (I saw the logs) all web hits from random school districts. They (non-educators) then decided what web sites were appropriate and what web sites should be blocked. Sorry guys... they didn't want the children (grades K - 8) to read Slashdot, among many others. In my last few months, I saw a very visible drop in interest towards the internet. It's a damn shame and I really don't want to see the same thing happen in the libraries.
Don't get you wrong? I have to get you wrong. Chrissy O'Donnell would not be a better Peter Parker than Bruce Campbell. Besides, I can't totally speak for Sam Raimi, but I'd say that he would rather work with Campbell.
If Bruce Campbell gets this part, it will probably turn out to be my favorite movie. The campiness that oozes out of him will do the role justice. I just can't imagine Leo doing it (as was rumoured early on.) He's one of the most underrated actors in Holly v v ood, and he really deserves to play what will probably become the next big francise. Anyway, if Bruce doesn't do it... I will.
It's a good question to be raised, I don't know who it will benefit, but a good question. To me, common sense is the only issue at hand. Sure, there are experts in their respective fields, but there is still no accounting for the use of ethics and morals. On/. I have seen a great many people, many of them on par with what I believe is the intellectual standard. This doesn't apply to how long a person has spent in school or how many degrees he/she has, but how this person governs him/herself in society. If a person can't compile a kernel, HEY- I let it slide. If a person decides that tracking cars by satellite is a good idea, HEY- this person is a fool who shouldn't be part of our society. Just my opinion, but it happens to be right.
A recurring theme in many posts seems to be the reassurance of having a weapon on hand. If something bad really does happen, a shovel will not help when fighting the Communist invaders. The Communists are frightened by bright light, and that is why I have secured a large Mag-lite flashlight from Sears. I happen to be in New York at the moment, but am fleeing to a mountain in Vermont to escape the onslaught of innocent life that will occur when Dick Clark drops the ball in Times Square. The Communists and the disciples of Osama Bin Laden will begin gassing the crowds just as I am making my third run down a slope during "Midnight Runs" in Vermont. I will have my Mag-Lite in hand just in case.
bomb osama bin laden empire state building fbi cia nsa illuminati dyNOmite c-4 terrorist reagan carter clinton bush komehni mosaad jdl world trade center testing one two testing one two. Ahem, Ahem. Now that my throat is clear, I will continue. I think that most of us have known for a long time that most transmissions were monitored, but the extent and organization that the BBC story alludes to is just incredible. Everyone gets that feeling sometimes that someone is watching over their shoulder. Now you get to see who it is. Big deal. What's going to change? Nothing. Who can regulate an international mafia? No one. I'm not saying to bend over and smear on the vaseline just yet, but unless this story is thrown into a bigger arena for the herd to read, nothing significant is going to happen. IMHOA
Let's charge the FCC some Air Tax. Everytime they inhale they must pay a tax. That is just about as sensible as this proposed modem tax. Then again if I was on the FCC board and I knew that taxing the public for airtime would increase my salary sometime down the line, a tax would seem like a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
We have something in NY called the "MetroCard". Same idea, one step behind.
I dropped an E-Bomb on Saturday night.... 3 of them actually.
I'm gonna go out and bang some white women.
Why do geeks have to be ugly? I get mad bitches.
You should get beated up.
I think having every resource at your finger tips during a test is a great idea. I also think the tests' quality should reflect your newfound power. The tests given in high schools, and even in many colleges, wouldn't work well with having the Internet and all it's resources available during the test.
Many tests are written specifically for one answer. Ex: "Who was the first president of the U.S.?" This is the type of question that will be quite easy to find the answer to. But asking multi-layed questions like "Who was the first president of the U.S., and how did he come about winning the presidency?"-- Not exactly genius level, but more suited to having a laptop at your desk.
__
Yeah, and Billie Jean is not my son.
__
For almost one year, I worked for the New York City Board of Education as a computer technician. In my short tenure at the BOE I had the extreme displeasure to witness the implementation of a filtering system called Netgear. Without question, filtering net access caused more problems than it solved. This was a city-wide rollout, so I'm talking about all of New York City here. Before the age of filtering (my first 4 months) I noticed that the children, for the most part, used the internet access available to them on a daily basis to send email to each other, search for Pokemon stories, participate in chats, help in their homework etc... and all was well. Enter Netgear- first filtering priority- NO email and NO web-based chat. In the following days, the Netgear administrators at Metrotech (BOE technology center) watched and logged (I saw the logs) all web hits from random school districts. They (non-educators) then decided what web sites were appropriate and what web sites should be blocked. Sorry guys... they didn't want the children (grades K - 8) to read Slashdot, among many others. In my last few months, I saw a very visible drop in interest towards the internet. It's a damn shame and I really don't want to see the same thing happen in the libraries.
Why is the above fella a troll? What does that make me?
OFF TOPIC????? You're OFF TOPIC!!! Idiot.
Leave me alone, leave me alone. Politics, Politics. It was actually a typo g r aphical error. Somehow the 'w' got separated.
That fisherman isn't Raimi... http://www.bruce-campbell.com - check out the rumour section. Bruce demystifies the idea.
Don't get you wrong? I have to get you wrong. Chrissy O'Donnell would not be a better Peter Parker than Bruce Campbell. Besides, I can't totally speak for Sam Raimi, but I'd say that he would rather work with Campbell.
If Bruce Campbell gets this part, it will probably turn out to be my favorite movie. The campiness that oozes out of him will do the role justice. I just can't imagine Leo doing it (as was rumoured early on.) He's one of the most underrated actors in Holly v v ood, and he really deserves to play what will probably become the next big francise. Anyway, if Bruce doesn't do it... I will.
It's a good question to be raised, I don't know who it will benefit, but a good question. To me, common sense is the only issue at hand. Sure, there are experts in their respective fields, but there is still no accounting for the use of ethics and morals. On /. I have seen a great many people, many of them on par with what I believe is the intellectual standard. This doesn't apply to how long a person has spent in school or how many degrees he/she has, but how this person governs him/herself in society. If a person can't compile a kernel, HEY- I let it slide. If a person decides that tracking cars by satellite is a good idea, HEY- this person is a fool who shouldn't be part of our society. Just my opinion, but it happens to be right.
A recurring theme in many posts seems to be the reassurance of having a weapon on hand. If something bad really does happen, a shovel will not help when fighting the Communist invaders. The Communists are frightened by bright light, and that is why I have secured a large Mag-lite flashlight from Sears. I happen to be in New York at the moment, but am fleeing to a mountain in Vermont to escape the onslaught of innocent life that will occur when Dick Clark drops the ball in Times Square.
The Communists and the disciples of Osama Bin Laden will begin gassing the crowds just as I am making my third run down a slope during "Midnight Runs" in Vermont. I will have my Mag-Lite in hand just in case.
Right back at ya pally.
Now I can stay home and watch the movie that upset me so much when I saw it on premiere day. Fantastic. Lucas- Who's your daddy?
I'll fall for the bait... You must be Canadian eh? You're just a J.O.
That really sucks, her voice will be missed.
You hit it dead on man... They're just sucking Satan's pecker.
Good points my man.
bomb osama bin laden empire state building fbi cia nsa illuminati dyNOmite c-4 terrorist reagan carter clinton bush komehni mosaad jdl world trade center testing one two testing one two. Ahem, Ahem. Now that my throat is clear, I will continue. I think that most of us have known for a long time that most transmissions were monitored, but the extent and organization that the BBC story alludes to is just incredible. Everyone gets that feeling sometimes that someone is watching over their shoulder. Now you get to see who it is. Big deal.
What's going to change? Nothing. Who can regulate an international mafia? No one.
I'm not saying to bend over and smear on the vaseline just yet, but unless this story is thrown into a bigger arena for the herd to read, nothing significant is going to happen. IMHOA
Let's charge the FCC some Air Tax. Everytime they inhale they must pay a tax. That is just about as sensible as this proposed modem tax. Then again if I was on the FCC board and I knew that taxing the public for airtime would increase my salary sometime down the line, a tax would seem like a good idea.
Was Apple just /.ed? I think so. Perfect timing.