I should also mention that, at least in France, England, Germany, and Spain (and probably others as well, but those are the only ones I've read about) even those students that go down the intellectual/academic track have some choice over what they study in high school. Don't like math or suck at it? Take (in France for example) the L (lettres) or ES (Economie-Sciences sociales) track in school rather than S (sciences).:)
That's why students who don't want to study purely intellectual subjects and/or who don't plan on going on to university to study a traditional academic subject shouldn't have to take the same history, English, and math as those who do. For an example of how this can work, read up on the education systems of most western European countries, where students are sorted into different types of schools based on their interests and aptitudes around age 14 to 16 or so (depending on the country). This allows the standards in the "intellectual/academic" schools (which service approximately one third of students) to be kept quite high, while freeing everyone who doesn't want to go to college from wasting their time preparing for it. Their educational achievement is much higher than ours, and I think most of the reason is our one-size-fits-all "comprehensive high schools" (which are the exception, rather than the norm, among rich countries).
I have a little bit of a beef with this. Why should math have to apply to real life?
Is "this doesn't apply to real life" a valid criticism to apply to an English or History class? No, we study those subjects purely because they are interesting, and good intellectual training.
The biggest problem isn't that teachers didn't teach you real-world applications of what you were doing; it's that they didn't make it clear that studying math is worthwhile (and dare I say fun?) even *without* any real-world applications!
(Note: I'm not saying applications shouldn't be given their due, but reducing mathematics to applications doesn't do justice to mathematics.)
Are you an expert in complexity theory? Or even a mathematician of any kind? If not, sorry, but this proof wasn't meant for your consumption and it'd be ridiculous to expect the author or anyone else to go through several years of work proving it formally in order for you to verify its correctness to your satisfaction. If you want that, you should pay for it to be done; no one else is going to do so because no one cares.
I'm too tired to give any commentary about this, or even tell you whether I think comparing the U.S. to China is valid, so I'll leave it as "food for thought": the country with the largest fraction of its population in prison is the United States.
I know this... some of my favorite games ever are from the Game and Watch series. I think I might hold the world record for Vermin:). In some games, the fun doesn't come from the realism. But in some, it definitely does -- at least in part. Playing Bioshock is, to some extent, fun in the same way watching a movie is fun rather than in the same way playing Pac-Man is fun.
Given this, it's not hard to understand why it sucks when the illusion is shattered in games of that sort -- I think most of us can disagree that suspension of disbelief is an important part of enjoying a movie, for most people.
This is the biggest problem I have with cheesy minigames. Really? I have to "hack a computer" by redirecting pipes so water can flow through them? (Or whatever the hell it is you're doing in Bioshock... this is the best way I can explain it). That shit was fun when it came with my Games for Windows 95 pack, but it's a bit out of place in a modern immersive shooter.
If the younger partner is over puberty, it's not pedophilia, by definition. If you change "pedophilia" to "underage sexual relationships" or something, you have a valid argument:)
One ID you can use anywhere? Sounds a lot like what the OpenID project is already trying to do. It's a nice concept, but I don't like the idea of anything like this being run by the government. Government interference with the internet seems to be the fastest way to dystopia, these days.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, so the correct thing to do is say "I don't know" since it's a leap of faith to assume either answer.
However, work in general (math, engineering, research, etc) can never be automated and replace humans.
How do you know this is true? You seem to be assuming without any argument that true AI will never be created: a huge leap of faith if you ask me.
Did you know that Harvard is a non-profit institution, and also that they lose money on every undergraduate student enrolled?
"the overwhelming majority of people", not even "some people", :)
Promise you don't take any hostages when you release this manifesto, mmmkay? (Not that I don't agree with it :) )
If you're ever in Phoenix, stop by Castles and Coasters... they have 20 or so pinball machines in the arcade, if I remember correctly.
Or anyone in a lot of debt, I imagine.
This reminds me of the Slashdot story on several-thousand-dollar ethernet cables from Monster a few years back. *sigh*
Just wait until the first person tries to blow up a train. Then many of those advantages will vanish.
I should also mention that, at least in France, England, Germany, and Spain (and probably others as well, but those are the only ones I've read about) even those students that go down the intellectual/academic track have some choice over what they study in high school. Don't like math or suck at it? Take (in France for example) the L (lettres) or ES (Economie-Sciences sociales) track in school rather than S (sciences). :)
That's why students who don't want to study purely intellectual subjects and/or who don't plan on going on to university to study a traditional academic subject shouldn't have to take the same history, English, and math as those who do. For an example of how this can work, read up on the education systems of most western European countries, where students are sorted into different types of schools based on their interests and aptitudes around age 14 to 16 or so (depending on the country). This allows the standards in the "intellectual/academic" schools (which service approximately one third of students) to be kept quite high, while freeing everyone who doesn't want to go to college from wasting their time preparing for it. Their educational achievement is much higher than ours, and I think most of the reason is our one-size-fits-all "comprehensive high schools" (which are the exception, rather than the norm, among rich countries).
I have a little bit of a beef with this. Why should math have to apply to real life?
Is "this doesn't apply to real life" a valid criticism to apply to an English or History class? No, we study those subjects purely because they are interesting, and good intellectual training.
The biggest problem isn't that teachers didn't teach you real-world applications of what you were doing; it's that they didn't make it clear that studying math is worthwhile (and dare I say fun?) even *without* any real-world applications!
(Note: I'm not saying applications shouldn't be given their due, but reducing mathematics to applications doesn't do justice to mathematics.)
So you live in a country without a broken education system. You don't need to brag about it!
Are you an expert in complexity theory? Or even a mathematician of any kind? If not, sorry, but this proof wasn't meant for your consumption and it'd be ridiculous to expect the author or anyone else to go through several years of work proving it formally in order for you to verify its correctness to your satisfaction. If you want that, you should pay for it to be done; no one else is going to do so because no one cares.
"NP" doesn't mean "impossible", so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
First public proof attempt? I think not.
http://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm
Presumably the disks would not include 24 with all the commercials, so one season would actually be quite substantially less than 24 hours of video.
I'm too tired to give any commentary about this, or even tell you whether I think comparing the U.S. to China is valid, so I'll leave it as "food for thought": the country with the largest fraction of its population in prison is the United States.
I know this... some of my favorite games ever are from the Game and Watch series. I think I might hold the world record for Vermin :). In some games, the fun doesn't come from the realism. But in some, it definitely does -- at least in part. Playing Bioshock is, to some extent, fun in the same way watching a movie is fun rather than in the same way playing Pac-Man is fun.
Given this, it's not hard to understand why it sucks when the illusion is shattered in games of that sort -- I think most of us can disagree that suspension of disbelief is an important part of enjoying a movie, for most people.
Nice sig! :)
As for Prince of Persia, never played it.
This is the biggest problem I have with cheesy minigames. Really? I have to "hack a computer" by redirecting pipes so water can flow through them? (Or whatever the hell it is you're doing in Bioshock... this is the best way I can explain it). That shit was fun when it came with my Games for Windows 95 pack, but it's a bit out of place in a modern immersive shooter.
If the younger partner is over puberty, it's not pedophilia, by definition. If you change "pedophilia" to "underage sexual relationships" or something, you have a valid argument :)
One ID you can use anywhere? Sounds a lot like what the OpenID project is already trying to do. It's a nice concept, but I don't like the idea of anything like this being run by the government. Government interference with the internet seems to be the fastest way to dystopia, these days.
I agree with you completely.
Sure Muslim countries would put a fast end to a European migratory invasion by Europeans
Didn't seem to work out too well in Palestine...