Yes, Real Genius is streamable from Netflix. Now, lets see what happens when it becomes the single most watched movie of the day. Someone at Netflix is going to be really confused.
No you wouldn't. I consistantly look at my iPhone and MyTouch and wonder why no one is making a controller that the phone just slips into. The only problem with these devices for gaming is that they don't have physical buttons placed properly for gaming. So, make a 'case' that either connects via the data line, or via bluetooth that has proper buttons and directional pads. Have the controls and the audio pass through to the phone, and you now have a phone that is just as good for gaming as a dedicated gaming device.
The cause for our failing education system is on every single level.
1) Parents that use the schools as babysitters, or worse yet, orphanages. The vast majority of parents have abdicated the raising of their children to the state. Very few of them really care if their child is learning. What they care about is if they get good grades. This leads to massive grade inflation as well as heavy pressure on the teachers to avoid conflict by just passing students. Hand in hand with that is that huge numbers of parents (most?) believe that if their kids are getting good grades, that the kids are learning. This belief goes so far as to make parents believe that if they pressure the teacher to give their kid a C instead of an F, then somehow the kid will have magically learned the material. I have actually had parents tell me that their school is obviously good because their kid is getting straight As. These beliefs allow parents to tell themselves that they fulfilled their responsibilities, and if their kid ends up stupid, it isn't their fault.
2) Teachers that are not even smart enough to do basic math. Their own advocacy groups show that they are in the top half of earners in almost every state. Yet, they constantly complain that they are in poverty. They don't seem to be able to do the math that shows they are well above average on an hourly scale. They also lie (even to themselves) about the number of hours worked. I have known many teachers, and none of them worked an inordinate number of hours, except for the few language teachers that regularly assigned essays.
Teachers like to talk big about how well educated they are and how they spend 40 hours a week and three months a year outside of school hours to make lesson plans. If they are spending that much time over and over again, they are simply incompetent. With all of that effort, they should also have written plenty of material that buying books would be totally unnecessary.
Right here on on Slashdot, we regularly get stories about how technology doesn't get used well in schools because teachers are unable or unwilling to learn how to use it. These are supposed to be professionals in learning. If they cannot learn better and faster than average, they are obviously unqualified for their jobs.
3) Teachers Unions Teachers Unions are a business. They have to keep teachers dissatisfied with their jobs to stay in business. People in any field that are dissatsified are going to do a worse job. The Unions are one of the biggest factors in making teachers believe that they are underpaid.
4) Administrators that cannot properly run and educational institution. Schools are run as a for profit business. The administrators (with support from the Teachers and Unions) place revenue above education. The fact that a student can pass a class without knowing the material just by showing up so the school can collect money, while a student that takes a three week vacation, but knows the material inside and out fails, shows that education is not the administrations concern.
5) State Politicians take the "not enough money is spent" stance because they can say what everyone knows, without blaming anyone for the problem. The problem being poor education. Here in California, the single largest line item in our state budget is public education, yet we consistantly hear that lack of money is the reason our schools suck. By blaming money, they get to bow to special interest like Teachers Unions, without having to fix the problem.
6) Federal Politicians. While I have not personally heard Obama make any anti-education comments, while Bush was the President Of The United States, he referred to the kids that did well in school as "The Nerd Patrol" in a nationally televised speech.
Each and every one of these groups will point fingers and make the correct statement that it is one of the other groups that is failing in our educational system. Unfortun
And THAT is the correct answer. As much as I have an opinion on what the best way to handle steep hills in a manual transmission, any argument about it is totally off topic.
Yes, it is a social problem in that society keeps will redefine the word 'poverty' so that no matter how wealthy people are, some of them will always be defined as being in 'poverty'. Here in the US, most of the people in 'poverty' live in conditions that would have been considered opulent just a few hundred years ago.
Technology has been the primary motivator to raise up the entire population. Social solutions only bring the poor up at the expense of the rich. They level the playing field. So, if your definition of 'poverty' is a relative one, and you just don't like it that some people have more than other people, then yes, poverty is a social problem, and has little to do with people's quality of life, as that definition of poverty could just as easily take people that are in 'poverty' and take them out of 'poverty' by taking everything away from the rich, and not changing the quality of life of those in 'poverty' beyond some kind of warm fuzzy feeling they might get by knowing that no one else has it better.
On the other hand, if your definition of 'poverty' is more absolute, and you are looking at the quality of life for those in 'poverty' irrelevant of how much else someone else has, poverty is a technological problem.
c) Piracy (in the sense of copying another's work that they did not want others to copied) has been going on long before DRM was ever invented or even called that name. It's older than the notion of copyright itself.
And don't forget, unavoidable. I have yet to see a single 'work' that does not use someone else's 'work'. Not one. Not even this very post. One of the moral issues with copyright is that it is and always will be a case of "My shade of gray is better than your shade of gray".
I would agree with you if we started treating stereo use while driving or having arguing kids in the back while driving the same as driving while intoxicated. To do one and not the other would just be a case of outlawing a technology because of it's year of popularization.
Or they could crash while digging for that CD under the seat, or changing their talk radio station... Oh wait, radios were popularized before 1980, so they must not be evil like cell phones....
It is going to be as viable as what these people have now, and the next generation will be in a far better position than they will be if the population isn't reduced.
Sir, you need to reconsider your P.R. firm.
With an Amazing P.R. firm, you don't need steps 1 and 2. The teenage girls will gladly give you a pint or two, and you will have plenty of them to do your fill infusion.
I have never met a single home school family, and I have met over a thousand, that sent their dumb kid to public school and kept their smart kid home. How many have you met that have done that? I have met many home school families that have started homeschooling because their kid was dumb, or because they were "dumb". (as in they did really poorly at public school, but as soon as they were not being held back, they suddenly stopped being "dumb")
So, unless you have something other than personal denial, we can come to the conclusion that you are wrong about that.
You joke, but I wouldn't be surprised if you could sell a couple of thousand NewYorkCountryLawyer action figures. Especially if you gave him huge action figure muscles like they did for Luke Skywalker.
Correct. Of course, a 12 year old's education by MY standards. Certainly, they think that because they graduated high school, they have at least a 19 year old's education.
If the majority of homeschoolers are schooled by parents with college degrees (using Wikipedia article here), and the majority of public school kids do not have parents with college degrees.
Well, that is a rigged statement. The proper comparison would be:
If the majority of homeschoolers are schooled by parents with college degrees (using Wikipedia article here), and the majority of public school kids ARE SCHOOLED by people with college degrees.
So, why is it that non-professionals consistently do a better job than professionals? Shouldn't you expect a professional to do a better job than a non-professional?
German law becomes irrelevant when the people are seeking asylum in the US. As for having uneducated hicks running around... At least here in the US, having a teaching credential is in no way an indication that the teacher is reasonably educated. Attending public school in no way indicates that a child is properly educated. Homeschooled kids regularly out perform public schooled kids, which is why the 'socialization' argument ALWAYS comes up.
Is that an absolute? As in no science or math at all? If so, you have no idea what you are talking about. These parents would be hard pressed to raise their children with NO science or math. If you mean 'a reasonable amount' of science and math, you have no idea what your talking about, as the parents might be home schooling because the public schools don't teach what they consider 'a reasonable amount'. I know here in the US, the public schools do teach enough math. They don't even come close to teaching enough science, and they don't teach enough critical thinking to properly use the math they learn.
So, if you live in the US and send your kids to public school, we have to ask, who the shameful family actually is.
I agree with you, BUT as a society, we in the US have decided that it is a basic human right. The act of indoctrinating a child into a religion before they know what is going on is accepted and encouraged if you send your child to public school, but is considered an abuse if the child is home schooled. That and the entire argument that public school is about 'socilization' argues against public schools when it comes to "Transporting values by giving a good example".
The irony is that public schooled people have been 'brainwashed' into thinking that home schooling is about 'brainwashing' and that they are 'crackpots'.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Real Genius is streamable from Netflix. Now, lets see what happens when it becomes the single most watched movie of the day. Someone at Netflix is going to be really confused.
No you wouldn't. I consistantly look at my iPhone and MyTouch and wonder why no one is making a controller that the phone just slips into. The only problem with these devices for gaming is that they don't have physical buttons placed properly for gaming. So, make a 'case' that either connects via the data line, or via bluetooth that has proper buttons and directional pads. Have the controls and the audio pass through to the phone, and you now have a phone that is just as good for gaming as a dedicated gaming device.
The cause for our failing education system is on every single level.
1) Parents that use the schools as babysitters, or worse yet, orphanages. The vast majority of parents have abdicated the raising of their children to the state. Very few of them really care if their child is learning. What they care about is if they get good grades. This leads to massive grade inflation as well as heavy pressure on the teachers to avoid conflict by just passing students. Hand in hand with that is that huge numbers of parents (most?) believe that if their kids are getting good grades, that the kids are learning. This belief goes so far as to make parents believe that if they pressure the teacher to give their kid a C instead of an F, then somehow the kid will have magically learned the material. I have actually had parents tell me that their school is obviously good because their kid is getting straight As. These beliefs allow parents to tell themselves that they fulfilled their responsibilities, and if their kid ends up stupid, it isn't their fault.
2) Teachers that are not even smart enough to do basic math. Their own advocacy groups show that they are in the top half of earners in almost every state. Yet, they constantly complain that they are in poverty. They don't seem to be able to do the math that shows they are well above average on an hourly scale. They also lie (even to themselves) about the number of hours worked. I have known many teachers, and none of them worked an inordinate number of hours, except for the few language teachers that regularly assigned essays.
Teachers like to talk big about how well educated they are and how they spend 40 hours a week and three months a year outside of school hours to make lesson plans. If they are spending that much time over and over again, they are simply incompetent. With all of that effort, they should also have written plenty of material that buying books would be totally unnecessary.
Right here on on Slashdot, we regularly get stories about how technology doesn't get used well in schools because teachers are unable or unwilling to learn how to use it. These are supposed to be professionals in learning. If they cannot learn better and faster than average, they are obviously unqualified for their jobs.
3) Teachers Unions Teachers Unions are a business. They have to keep teachers dissatisfied with their jobs to stay in business. People in any field that are dissatsified are going to do a worse job. The Unions are one of the biggest factors in making teachers believe that they are underpaid.
4) Administrators that cannot properly run and educational institution. Schools are run as a for profit business. The administrators (with support from the Teachers and Unions) place revenue above education. The fact that a student can pass a class without knowing the material just by showing up so the school can collect money, while a student that takes a three week vacation, but knows the material inside and out fails, shows that education is not the administrations concern.
5) State Politicians take the "not enough money is spent" stance because they can say what everyone knows, without blaming anyone for the problem. The problem being poor education. Here in California, the single largest line item in our state budget is public education, yet we consistantly hear that lack of money is the reason our schools suck. By blaming money, they get to bow to special interest like Teachers Unions, without having to fix the problem.
6) Federal Politicians. While I have not personally heard Obama make any anti-education comments, while Bush was the President Of The United States, he referred to the kids that did well in school as "The Nerd Patrol" in a nationally televised speech.
Each and every one of these groups will point fingers and make the correct statement that it is one of the other groups that is failing in our educational system. Unfortun
And THAT is the correct answer. As much as I have an opinion on what the best way to handle steep hills in a manual transmission, any argument about it is totally off topic.
Yes, it is a social problem in that society keeps will redefine the word 'poverty' so that no matter how wealthy people are, some of them will always be defined as being in 'poverty'. Here in the US, most of the people in 'poverty' live in conditions that would have been considered opulent just a few hundred years ago.
Technology has been the primary motivator to raise up the entire population. Social solutions only bring the poor up at the expense of the rich. They level the playing field. So, if your definition of 'poverty' is a relative one, and you just don't like it that some people have more than other people, then yes, poverty is a social problem, and has little to do with people's quality of life, as that definition of poverty could just as easily take people that are in 'poverty' and take them out of 'poverty' by taking everything away from the rich, and not changing the quality of life of those in 'poverty' beyond some kind of warm fuzzy feeling they might get by knowing that no one else has it better.
On the other hand, if your definition of 'poverty' is more absolute, and you are looking at the quality of life for those in 'poverty' irrelevant of how much else someone else has, poverty is a technological problem.
c) Piracy (in the sense of copying another's work that they did not want others to copied) has been going on long before DRM was ever invented or even called that name. It's older than the notion of copyright itself.
And don't forget, unavoidable. I have yet to see a single 'work' that does not use someone else's 'work'. Not one. Not even this very post. One of the moral issues with copyright is that it is and always will be a case of "My shade of gray is better than your shade of gray".
That's a good question. What does a license to play a song on the radio cost?
I would agree with you if we started treating stereo use while driving or having arguing kids in the back while driving the same as driving while intoxicated. To do one and not the other would just be a case of outlawing a technology because of it's year of popularization.
Or they could crash while digging for that CD under the seat, or changing their talk radio station... Oh wait, radios were popularized before 1980, so they must not be evil like cell phones....
Because cell phones are eeevvviiiilllll.... EVIL YOU HEAR ME?!?!?!?!
It is going to be as viable as what these people have now, and the next generation will be in a far better position than they will be if the population isn't reduced.
Sir, you need to reconsider your P.R. firm. With an Amazing P.R. firm, you don't need steps 1 and 2. The teenage girls will gladly give you a pint or two, and you will have plenty of them to do your fill infusion.
Eh, I think you being overly optimistic that you will be able to buy the games electronically for less than you can buy they in cardboard.
I have never met a single home school family, and I have met over a thousand, that sent their dumb kid to public school and kept their smart kid home. How many have you met that have done that? I have met many home school families that have started homeschooling because their kid was dumb, or because they were "dumb". (as in they did really poorly at public school, but as soon as they were not being held back, they suddenly stopped being "dumb")
So, unless you have something other than personal denial, we can come to the conclusion that you are wrong about that.
You joke, but I wouldn't be surprised if you could sell a couple of thousand NewYorkCountryLawyer action figures. Especially if you gave him huge action figure muscles like they did for Luke Skywalker.
Yeah, maybe this device could help prevent us from having obese people like this.
Home schooling parents can ensure their kids succeed by only picking their above-average children.
Did you just say that home schooling parents pick their kids? Really? Wow. Just Wow.
Correct. Of course, a 12 year old's education by MY standards. Certainly, they think that because they graduated high school, they have at least a 19 year old's education.
If the majority of homeschoolers are schooled by parents with college degrees (using Wikipedia article here), and the majority of public school kids do not have parents with college degrees.
Well, that is a rigged statement. The proper comparison would be:
If the majority of homeschoolers are schooled by parents with college degrees (using Wikipedia article here), and the majority of public school kids ARE SCHOOLED by people with college degrees.
So, why is it that non-professionals consistently do a better job than professionals? Shouldn't you expect a professional to do a better job than a non-professional?
German law becomes irrelevant when the people are seeking asylum in the US. As for having uneducated hicks running around... At least here in the US, having a teaching credential is in no way an indication that the teacher is reasonably educated. Attending public school in no way indicates that a child is properly educated. Homeschooled kids regularly out perform public schooled kids, which is why the 'socialization' argument ALWAYS comes up.
Is that an absolute? As in no science or math at all? If so, you have no idea what you are talking about. These parents would be hard pressed to raise their children with NO science or math. If you mean 'a reasonable amount' of science and math, you have no idea what your talking about, as the parents might be home schooling because the public schools don't teach what they consider 'a reasonable amount'. I know here in the US, the public schools do teach enough math. They don't even come close to teaching enough science, and they don't teach enough critical thinking to properly use the math they learn.
So, if you live in the US and send your kids to public school, we have to ask, who the shameful family actually is.
I agree with you, BUT as a society, we in the US have decided that it is a basic human right. The act of indoctrinating a child into a religion before they know what is going on is accepted and encouraged if you send your child to public school, but is considered an abuse if the child is home schooled. That and the entire argument that public school is about 'socilization' argues against public schools when it comes to "Transporting values by giving a good example".
Ahhh... The whole, "send your kids to public school or you daughter will get pregnant" argument. That isn't even a good argument.
The irony is that public schooled people have been 'brainwashed' into thinking that home schooling is about 'brainwashing' and that they are 'crackpots'.
The treatment of football in our public schools is absolute proof that what you say is untrue.