I'm a grad student in the chemistry dept at UC Berkeley (arguably the best school in the world for my field). My department is mostly American; it's much harder to get in as an international student.
For public schools, US citizens are cheaper to pay for (since, in the sciences at least, the dept/your advisor pays your tuition. US citizens can get resident tuition, while international students can't). This is one of the major reasons that UC Berkeley has so many American students, followed by the top of the top among international students.
Undergraduate research is also really important in the admission process in Berkeley's chem dept. It's assumed that you have done research before coming here, and a lot of international schools don't push their undergraduates toward research experience. So again, US students have an advantage in the admissions process.
Anyway, this probably varies from school to school. Public/private is one divide to consider. Top 5/not top 5 is another.
A few thoughts based on my own experience, both as student and teacher (posting in direct response to you in the hopes that you'll actually get the message, since this is a little late). I don't have a ton of teaching experience, but I do have some thoughts. I've mostly taught chemistry (some which might be considered more about physics).
One thing to remember is the importance of giving your kinesthetic learners the time to take notes. You actually *don't* want to speed up class too much, and that's one of the dangers of PowerPoint. If you have to write it on the board, your students have time to write it in their notes.
I feel that technology only has two advantages in the classroom: it can draw better than you can, and it can show things changes in time better than you can. The question is whether your course needs it. For multidimensional calculus, it can be great. But if you're plotting functions of a single variable, you can sketch those on the board just as easily. On the other hand, if you're teaching quantum dynamics (my field) you may want to show how both the real and imaginary parts of the wavefunction evolve in time.... try sketching that!
One way I've tried to use technology is to make a website with extra material. In any class, you have some great students and some not-so-great students. In the classroom, it's impossible both to challenge the best kids and to help the kids who are struggling. I use a website to provide enrichment opportunities for the interested students and remedial materials for the weaker students. It's not a flashy as cool demos in the classroom, but I think it can make a big difference for the students.
Good luck teaching!
Yeah, but where is the original "Hair" soundtrack from the mid 70's? Or, an original "Fiddler on the Roof"?
I've got Hair on LP but I don't own a turntable anymore
1968, not mid-70s (assuming you're referring to the Broadway soundtrack). And it's right here. If what you want is the 1978 movie, you can get the DVD, but I don't know why you would want to.
Hmmm... I think a good friend of mine took that position around that time. She started in DC (which she didn't like), moved to Atlanta (which she liked more), and is now working in Mountain View (and she loves the Bay Area) -- that's after a promotion or two, as well. Really, taking a couple years to get to a position you like at a company you like in a city you like, and with room to go up, is not such a bad thing.
You may have been short-sighted in assuming that where you start is where you end up. Google offered her room to grow, and that's one advantage that larger companies have. I think she'd say her quality of life is pretty damn good now.
Linux is good enough on the desktop to do what most users need: web browsing, word processing, tracking finances, IM, email, and so forth. That's been true for a while. It may be hard to keep the system completely up to date, but most users I know don't upgrade their Windows or Mac software with every update.
Point being, if price was the main issue, or even a very substantial issue, Linux would be poised to dominate the market. I'm no economist, but it seems to me that the issues are: 1) computers come bundled with Windows, and users never switch. Maybe Dell selling Macs could have an effect on that, but price isn't the reason. 2) Public perception that there computers won't be able to do"what everyone else is doing." Both Linux and Macintosh suffer from this. (People still fear that data written on Windows formatted media can't be read by Macs, regardless of the truth.) And yes, Linux probably has that stigma worse than Macintosh does.
And FWIW, I'm not at all a Linux zealot. In fact, the only time I've touched a Linux box in the last year was when I was checking to see if the whole lab was off the network or if it was just a problem with my Mac. Actually, I'd say I'm a Macintosh zealot. I switched to Apple from a TRS-80, and haven't looked back.
(postscript: note the phrasing on that -- haven't touched the computer. I use a Linux box regularly in my work. But I use it remotely through my iBook G4)
Move to New Zealand: we're built on a plate boundary, and our government kindly provides us with natural disaster insurance for earthquakes.
Right. So I'm going to move somewhere because after the quake hits and destroys all my stuff, I'll be able to collect insurance (if I didn't killed killed in the disaster).
No thanks, I think I'll stick with my original plan, and move somewhere where I'll be safe from earthquakes altogether. That's why I'm starting grad school next year at Berkeley.
Oh shit. You got any good schools down there in NZ?
If Apple doesn't start filing lawsuits against P2P users in a reasonable amount of time (say, a month?), then I'll give some credence to this theory.
Just because Apple sues doesn't mean that they didn't plan for it to happen. In fact, if the (uncracked) developer version will run on any x86 box, I'd say that Apple *is* planning for piracy. They'd have to be stupid not to expect someone to put that online. Of course, Apple will still sue. It's like your high school-age son drinking: you know it's gonna happen, but you still punish him for doing it when you catch him.
And to clarify, they'd probably sue the same way they did before: if they can identify the person who distributed his copy of the OS, he's the one who gets sued. They won't start suing everyone downloading it on a P2P network any more than they did when Tiger was pirated before release.
If Apple didn't want it to happen, the developer machines would come with special hardware that was required to get the (uncracked) OS to run.
a bitter ex-fan decides to take the strips and replace the writing with, say, something you might find in Penthouse Forum. Not to say that there isn't a market for that kind of thing, just that UserFriendly has always been PG-rated for very specific reasons. I also don't appreciate someone else taking years of my own sweat and tears and in minutes turning it into something of which I don't particularly approve.
Could someone with more legal knowledge than me clear something up: wouldn't such use of Frazer's comics be considered parody, and therefore fair use? Or at least, so the "bitter ex-fan" could argue.
If you aren't doing something for the love of doing it, don't do it at all. Society will be better off for it.
If you don't mind me asking, what do you do for a living? If you hate it, then follow your own advice: quit and "don't do it at all." If you love it, then follow your own advice: quit and do the work "for the love of doing it," not for compensation.
The webcomic artists do love what they're doing, And some of them are trying to make a full-time job out of it, with the intent that they can provide better work that way. To my knowledge, none of them are really getting rich. They're just trying to make sure that they make enough to keep giving us our comics.
Does Dark Castle even run in Classic? That is, in an OS 9 environment? Man, I can't imagine playing Dark Castle on anything other than a Mac Plus (8 MHz) with 1MB RAM and System 6.0.4. I've got a feeling that it would either not work at all or run WAY too fast on my 1GHz iBook G4. No thanks, had enough trouble jumping over those boulders as it was!
Seriously though, my question in this thread: if you want the nostalgia, what's wrong with your old boxes? Honestly, if I wanted to play Dark Castle, or Wizardry, I'd pull the old Mac Plus out, dust it off, and stop playing before the power supply blew. At least, until someone tells me where I can get an emulator;-)
Question 1: What happened to the PowerPC's supposed performance advantage over Intel? [snip] Was that so much BS? Did Apple not really mean it? And why was the question totally ignored in this week's presentation?
No, the problem was not with the current PowerPCs, which are still competitive. The problem is with the next generation of chips. Apple isn't happy with the effort IBM is putting into them, and needs to keep competitive with the x86 world. By joining the x86 world, they are guaranteed to be competitive.
Question 2: What happened to Apple's 64-bit operating system? [snip] Certainly, he never said WHICH Intel chip they'd be using, just mentioning an unnamed 3.6-Ghz development system -- a system which apparently doesn't benchmark very well, either (it's in the links).
Did Cringely bother to watch the Keynote? I could go back and look, but when Jobs chose the "About this Mac" menu item, it said 3.6GHz Intel Pentium 4, as I remember. But that's irrelevant: that's what they're using FOR THE DEVELOPMENT systems. Odds are, when Apple ships Intel-based Macs next year, it'll be on a chip that Intel is finishing up development of now. Why on earth would they ship it on old tech if they didn't have to? Again, this switch is not about NOW, it's about the FUTURE.
Question 3: Where the heck is AMD?
There's a fair question. My guess is that either Jobs doesn't trust AMD's market position or doesn't trust AMD's future. Again, we're talking about where Apple is going in the future, not where things are at present. Is Steve's crystal ball a bit cloudy? We'll see in a couple years.
Question 4: Why announce this chip swap a year before it will even begin for customers?
Let's see... where did he announce this? At the WWDC, Apple's huge developer's convention. You want to make sure that you have native programs available when you ship. Same reason Apple announced the switch to PPC before shipping, same reason they announced the switch to OS X before shipping. The Osborne is a much less relevant example than the switch to PPC, which didn't kill Apple.
Question 5: Is this all really about Digital Rights Management?
I think Cringely gets this one right: NO.
Now my question for Cringely: how do I get a job where I'd actually get paid to write crap like that?
Yeah, but arecibo is ancient? I bet they could design a better radio telescope using LOTS of really small radio recievers in a grid?
IANARadio Astronomer, but my thoughts are as follows:
1. I would think that you still want the individual receivers as large as you can get away with, to collect as much radiation as possible. The VLA is an array of pretty big dishes, not a whole bunch of little radio receivers scattered around the desert.
2. I don't know that we have the technology to automatically assemble such a grid on the moon. Adding human assembly adds massive costs. That's to say nothing of maintenance: I'm not sure that you can design a useful radiotelescope without lots and lots of moving parts.
Don't get me wrong: I think that space-based radioastronomy would be a great thing, both for terrestial communications and for radioastronomy. I just don't think that it'll be cheap, meaning, sadly, that it'll take a lot of effort to convince the government of its usefulness.
Also it should not cost THAT much, I mean, if nasa can send two rovers to Mars, SETI should be able to send a observatory the much shorter distance to the Moon on public donations?
Have you SEEN Arecibo? Or the VLA? Compare that in size to our beloved rovers. Then let's talk about cost of transport to the moon.
Let them learn how to do math properly, then teach them how to use a calculator when they start studying higher maths that actually need one.
Erm, just which "higher maths" need calculators? I just finished a degree in mathematics, and I was allowed to use a calculator on exactly one test during the entire degree: Numerical Analysis (that is, the approximation of solutions using computational methods).
In high school, I learned how to use a calculator, which let me learn the minimum in calculus (etc) and still get good grades. So I never learned it right, until, after my first degree, I came back for a second one in maths.
I'd just leave it "let them learn to do maths properly."
IANA Interplanetary Scientist, but here's a thought:
You know that you will eventually lose the rover, be it in a dust storm or due to equipment failure or who knows what. So every day that you're not doing science is a day you lose, not a day you postpone.
Besides, like any good nerds, these guys came across a problem and weren't happy until they had a solution. Good for them!
Okay, I have to question Slashdot Reader Sanity when I see this one. Lemme answer your question.
NO.
The DMCA protects copyrighted works; if anything this work is an invention and therefore subject to Patent law, but not copyright.
Two comments:
1) Don't you think that this invention contains software, which is covered by copyright law?
2) I thought that the OP was supposed to be funny. At least, it made me laugh.
Hmm... I don't see where the article says that it is aimed at preventing irresponsible teenagers from getting drunk and bypassing the system. It seems to me a lot more like it's providing a way for responsible people (teenagers or otherwise) to recognize that they've had enough to drink that they shouldn't drive.
Drunken driving accidents increase in winter because every senselessly drunken teenager not properly educated by their parents will be wearing branded non-sensored gloves
So it's not perfect. But you seem to imply that drunk driving accidents (among teenagers, at least) will decrease in the summer. Isn't that a good thing?
When I say "basic concepts" I'm just talking about general exposure to ways in which behavior at the quantum level doesn't match up with the macro world ("here's what happens in the double-slit experiment," "here's what the uncertainty principle generally means," etc.).
Aha... yeah, I think of that as "popularization of science." Yeah, by all means, teach that. Those, to me, are teasers. You're not committing the "half-teaching" sin I was complaining about, because you're not really trying to explain it. You're saying, "hey, there's this whole other world that doesn't make intuitive sense." Those teasers were how I got hooked on physics. Might work for others, too.
I guess I just don't like sacrificing the best and brighest on the altar of the average student.
I don't think that's what I was arguing for. The problem is that you have to decide at what point you're going to cut off the attempts to provide challenges. My middle school pretty much decided to lump the 35-40 brightest out of 350 in the grade in a room together. A little too big, sure, but parents made it hard for them to draw the line. The problem is, in there you're looking at students above 90%ile or so. What can you offer to the one student who is 99.9%ile? At some point, the enrichment activities have to become the responsibility of the student (and parents, if the kid is lucky). Unless you want to ship them off to "smart schools," which parents might not be keen on.
Where that cut-off will be will depend on the school and the district. If you only have 2 or 3 gifted students per grade, how can you handle them? (Well, infinite money for schools would help, but politicians tend to promise more to schools than they give.)
The argument I was trying to make was 1) not to expect too much of the average student, because that's sure to backfire; 2) to recognize that the "enough to get by" teaching we tend to do (which aims to pack more ideas into the curriculum at the cost of depth of comprehension) often means that we have to relearn everything later (if we want to be innovators).
Personal note on 2): that's rather dear to me right now. I completed my undergrad in 2003. Now I'm getting a second undergrad in Math/CompSci, before I start my PhD in theoretical chemistry. Why? because my chemistry and physics majors did NOT teach me the math necessary to innovate in theoretical chemistry. The fact that I'd BS'd my way through high school math didn't help any, either. Anyway, it's been two years of my life. I hope I have the creativity to use the tools I've acquired in innovative ways. But I know that without these tools, I would have been at a serious disadvantage.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a grad student in the chemistry dept at UC Berkeley (arguably the best school in the world for my field). My department is mostly American; it's much harder to get in as an international student.
For public schools, US citizens are cheaper to pay for (since, in the sciences at least, the dept/your advisor pays your tuition. US citizens can get resident tuition, while international students can't). This is one of the major reasons that UC Berkeley has so many American students, followed by the top of the top among international students.
Undergraduate research is also really important in the admission process in Berkeley's chem dept. It's assumed that you have done research before coming here, and a lot of international schools don't push their undergraduates toward research experience. So again, US students have an advantage in the admissions process.
Anyway, this probably varies from school to school. Public/private is one divide to consider. Top 5/not top 5 is another.
A few thoughts based on my own experience, both as student and teacher (posting in direct response to you in the hopes that you'll actually get the message, since this is a little late). I don't have a ton of teaching experience, but I do have some thoughts. I've mostly taught chemistry (some which might be considered more about physics). One thing to remember is the importance of giving your kinesthetic learners the time to take notes. You actually *don't* want to speed up class too much, and that's one of the dangers of PowerPoint. If you have to write it on the board, your students have time to write it in their notes. I feel that technology only has two advantages in the classroom: it can draw better than you can, and it can show things changes in time better than you can. The question is whether your course needs it. For multidimensional calculus, it can be great. But if you're plotting functions of a single variable, you can sketch those on the board just as easily. On the other hand, if you're teaching quantum dynamics (my field) you may want to show how both the real and imaginary parts of the wavefunction evolve in time.... try sketching that! One way I've tried to use technology is to make a website with extra material. In any class, you have some great students and some not-so-great students. In the classroom, it's impossible both to challenge the best kids and to help the kids who are struggling. I use a website to provide enrichment opportunities for the interested students and remedial materials for the weaker students. It's not a flashy as cool demos in the classroom, but I think it can make a big difference for the students. Good luck teaching!
Interestingly, so does iPhoneAtlas. Same author? Don't know. [Nearly] same text? Yup.
Hmmm... I think a good friend of mine took that position around that time. She started in DC (which she didn't like), moved to Atlanta (which she liked more), and is now working in Mountain View (and she loves the Bay Area) -- that's after a promotion or two, as well. Really, taking a couple years to get to a position you like at a company you like in a city you like, and with room to go up, is not such a bad thing.
You may have been short-sighted in assuming that where you start is where you end up. Google offered her room to grow, and that's one advantage that larger companies have. I think she'd say her quality of life is pretty damn good now.
Point being, if price was the main issue, or even a very substantial issue, Linux would be poised to dominate the market. I'm no economist, but it seems to me that the issues are: 1) computers come bundled with Windows, and users never switch. Maybe Dell selling Macs could have an effect on that, but price isn't the reason. 2) Public perception that there computers won't be able to do"what everyone else is doing." Both Linux and Macintosh suffer from this. (People still fear that data written on Windows formatted media can't be read by Macs, regardless of the truth.) And yes, Linux probably has that stigma worse than Macintosh does.
And FWIW, I'm not at all a Linux zealot. In fact, the only time I've touched a Linux box in the last year was when I was checking to see if the whole lab was off the network or if it was just a problem with my Mac. Actually, I'd say I'm a Macintosh zealot. I switched to Apple from a TRS-80, and haven't looked back.
(postscript: note the phrasing on that -- haven't touched the computer. I use a Linux box regularly in my work. But I use it remotely through my iBook G4)
And this is why Linux has already destroyed Microsoft.
Usually, a typo... Unless it's some really kinky act no one has told me about.
I'm not going to say whether Linux or Solaris is a better OS. But it seems like the Linux code might be a bit more entertaining to read.
Right. So I'm going to move somewhere because after the quake hits and destroys all my stuff, I'll be able to collect insurance (if I didn't killed killed in the disaster).
No thanks, I think I'll stick with my original plan, and move somewhere where I'll be safe from earthquakes altogether. That's why I'm starting grad school next year at Berkeley.
Oh shit. You got any good schools down there in NZ?
Just because Apple sues doesn't mean that they didn't plan for it to happen. In fact, if the (uncracked) developer version will run on any x86 box, I'd say that Apple *is* planning for piracy. They'd have to be stupid not to expect someone to put that online. Of course, Apple will still sue. It's like your high school-age son drinking: you know it's gonna happen, but you still punish him for doing it when you catch him.
And to clarify, they'd probably sue the same way they did before: if they can identify the person who distributed his copy of the OS, he's the one who gets sued. They won't start suing everyone downloading it on a P2P network any more than they did when Tiger was pirated before release.
If Apple didn't want it to happen, the developer machines would come with special hardware that was required to get the (uncracked) OS to run.
a bitter ex-fan decides to take the strips and replace the writing with, say, something you might find in Penthouse Forum. Not to say that there isn't a market for that kind of thing, just that UserFriendly has always been PG-rated for very specific reasons. I also don't appreciate someone else taking years of my own sweat and tears and in minutes turning it into something of which I don't particularly approve.
Could someone with more legal knowledge than me clear something up: wouldn't such use of Frazer's comics be considered parody, and therefore fair use? Or at least, so the "bitter ex-fan" could argue.
If you don't mind me asking, what do you do for a living? If you hate it, then follow your own advice: quit and "don't do it at all." If you love it, then follow your own advice: quit and do the work "for the love of doing it," not for compensation.
The webcomic artists do love what they're doing, And some of them are trying to make a full-time job out of it, with the intent that they can provide better work that way. To my knowledge, none of them are really getting rich. They're just trying to make sure that they make enough to keep giving us our comics.
Does Dark Castle even run in Classic? That is, in an OS 9 environment? Man, I can't imagine playing Dark Castle on anything other than a Mac Plus (8 MHz) with 1MB RAM and System 6.0.4. I've got a feeling that it would either not work at all or run WAY too fast on my 1GHz iBook G4. No thanks, had enough trouble jumping over those boulders as it was!
Seriously though, my question in this thread: if you want the nostalgia, what's wrong with your old boxes? Honestly, if I wanted to play Dark Castle, or Wizardry, I'd pull the old Mac Plus out, dust it off, and stop playing before the power supply blew. At least, until someone tells me where I can get an emulator ;-)
Question 1: What happened to the PowerPC's supposed performance advantage over Intel? [snip] Was that so much BS? Did Apple not really mean it? And why was the question totally ignored in this week's presentation?
No, the problem was not with the current PowerPCs, which are still competitive. The problem is with the next generation of chips. Apple isn't happy with the effort IBM is putting into them, and needs to keep competitive with the x86 world. By joining the x86 world, they are guaranteed to be competitive.
Question 2: What happened to Apple's 64-bit operating system? [snip] Certainly, he never said WHICH Intel chip they'd be using, just mentioning an unnamed 3.6-Ghz development system -- a system which apparently doesn't benchmark very well, either (it's in the links).
Did Cringely bother to watch the Keynote? I could go back and look, but when Jobs chose the "About this Mac" menu item, it said 3.6GHz Intel Pentium 4, as I remember. But that's irrelevant: that's what they're using FOR THE DEVELOPMENT systems. Odds are, when Apple ships Intel-based Macs next year, it'll be on a chip that Intel is finishing up development of now. Why on earth would they ship it on old tech if they didn't have to? Again, this switch is not about NOW, it's about the FUTURE.
Question 3: Where the heck is AMD?
There's a fair question. My guess is that either Jobs doesn't trust AMD's market position or doesn't trust AMD's future. Again, we're talking about where Apple is going in the future, not where things are at present. Is Steve's crystal ball a bit cloudy? We'll see in a couple years.
Question 4: Why announce this chip swap a year before it will even begin for customers?
Let's see... where did he announce this? At the WWDC, Apple's huge developer's convention. You want to make sure that you have native programs available when you ship. Same reason Apple announced the switch to PPC before shipping, same reason they announced the switch to OS X before shipping. The Osborne is a much less relevant example than the switch to PPC, which didn't kill Apple.
Question 5: Is this all really about Digital Rights Management?
I think Cringely gets this one right: NO.
Now my question for Cringely: how do I get a job where I'd actually get paid to write crap like that?
Not to mention iCringely...
HE'S BEEN IN ON IT ALL ALONG!!!!!!11oneone!
IANARadio Astronomer, but my thoughts are as follows:
1. I would think that you still want the individual receivers as large as you can get away with, to collect as much radiation as possible. The VLA is an array of pretty big dishes, not a whole bunch of little radio receivers scattered around the desert.
2. I don't know that we have the technology to automatically assemble such a grid on the moon. Adding human assembly adds massive costs. That's to say nothing of maintenance: I'm not sure that you can design a useful radiotelescope without lots and lots of moving parts.
Don't get me wrong: I think that space-based radioastronomy would be a great thing, both for terrestial communications and for radioastronomy. I just don't think that it'll be cheap, meaning, sadly, that it'll take a lot of effort to convince the government of its usefulness.
Have you SEEN Arecibo? Or the VLA? Compare that in size to our beloved rovers. Then let's talk about cost of transport to the moon.
Erm, just which "higher maths" need calculators? I just finished a degree in mathematics, and I was allowed to use a calculator on exactly one test during the entire degree: Numerical Analysis (that is, the approximation of solutions using computational methods).
In high school, I learned how to use a calculator, which let me learn the minimum in calculus (etc) and still get good grades. So I never learned it right, until, after my first degree, I came back for a second one in maths.
I'd just leave it "let them learn to do maths properly."
IANA Interplanetary Scientist, but here's a thought:
You know that you will eventually lose the rover, be it in a dust storm or due to equipment failure or who knows what. So every day that you're not doing science is a day you lose, not a day you postpone.
Besides, like any good nerds, these guys came across a problem and weren't happy until they had a solution. Good for them!
NO.
The DMCA protects copyrighted works; if anything this work is an invention and therefore subject to Patent law, but not copyright.
Two comments:
1) Don't you think that this invention contains software, which is covered by copyright law?
2) I thought that the OP was supposed to be funny. At least, it made me laugh.
Seriously... between this and ICANN finally approving .xxx as a TLD, I had to check my calendar. June 2, not April 1. Okay.
Drunken driving accidents increase in winter because every senselessly drunken teenager not properly educated by their parents will be wearing branded non-sensored gloves
So it's not perfect. But you seem to imply that drunk driving accidents (among teenagers, at least) will decrease in the summer. Isn't that a good thing?
Try http://www.phrack.org/ The link (without the "www.") didn't work for me. (Server not found)
Aha... yeah, I think of that as "popularization of science." Yeah, by all means, teach that. Those, to me, are teasers. You're not committing the "half-teaching" sin I was complaining about, because you're not really trying to explain it. You're saying, "hey, there's this whole other world that doesn't make intuitive sense." Those teasers were how I got hooked on physics. Might work for others, too.
I guess I just don't like sacrificing the best and brighest on the altar of the average student.
I don't think that's what I was arguing for. The problem is that you have to decide at what point you're going to cut off the attempts to provide challenges. My middle school pretty much decided to lump the 35-40 brightest out of 350 in the grade in a room together. A little too big, sure, but parents made it hard for them to draw the line. The problem is, in there you're looking at students above 90%ile or so. What can you offer to the one student who is 99.9%ile? At some point, the enrichment activities have to become the responsibility of the student (and parents, if the kid is lucky). Unless you want to ship them off to "smart schools," which parents might not be keen on.
Where that cut-off will be will depend on the school and the district. If you only have 2 or 3 gifted students per grade, how can you handle them? (Well, infinite money for schools would help, but politicians tend to promise more to schools than they give.)
The argument I was trying to make was 1) not to expect too much of the average student, because that's sure to backfire; 2) to recognize that the "enough to get by" teaching we tend to do (which aims to pack more ideas into the curriculum at the cost of depth of comprehension) often means that we have to relearn everything later (if we want to be innovators).
Personal note on 2): that's rather dear to me right now. I completed my undergrad in 2003. Now I'm getting a second undergrad in Math/CompSci, before I start my PhD in theoretical chemistry. Why? because my chemistry and physics majors did NOT teach me the math necessary to innovate in theoretical chemistry. The fact that I'd BS'd my way through high school math didn't help any, either. Anyway, it's been two years of my life. I hope I have the creativity to use the tools I've acquired in innovative ways. But I know that without these tools, I would have been at a serious disadvantage.