It shouldn't be about being able to use certain products or being able to do a specific task, the real goal should be teaching the kids to find out how to do things for themselves.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to learn things for himself, and he'll be a hell of a lot more than a fisherman.
Newsflash for you: countries with high standards of living don't produce as many terrorists. Do you think that it's a coincidence that places like Afghanistan, Iran, and much of the Middle East produce terrorists? For the most part, people aren't willing to blow themselves up if they're healthy, educated, and above the poverty line. Instead of blowing up a whole bunch of stuff and making a giant mess that won't be solved before 10+ years of nation building is over, why not feed people, clothe people, and prevent them from dying of diarrhea, all for a fraction of the US military budget.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't be ready to fight those that want to kill us, I just don't think that we should wait until we have people who want to kill us.
Except that a terrorist would need the plane to send data that far too, in order for a connection to form. Beyond that, they would need to know the bluetooth address. All this is assuming that the wireless won't be encrypted, which would be so obvious that not even the most idiotic engineer in the world couldn't point that out.
Heck, that's assuming that the US military could free up 1 million soldiers willing to fight fellow Americans. When you get 30% of the population together on something, there are going to be families with fathers vs sons, brothers vs brothers, etc.
The Tripolitan War wasn't that complicated. The US paid for protection from pirates because our navy was terrible. Jefferson didn't like the idea of paying pirates, so we stopped paying them and went to war so our ships would be protected. Seems pretty clear cut to me.
And no, a civil war won't be more pleasant, but war never is. It's the peace, and the freedom gained after the war that will be pleasant (provided those who really care about freedom win).
Some prison labor may exist: but its the same as US prison labor.
The slave labor of political prisoners who are only in jail for dissenting against the Chinese government is not the same as the paid (albeit at a low rate) labor of prisoners who are in jail for murder, rape, theft, etc.
And people in future societies won't be able to either find or create radioactive isotopes of Cesium-137? I was pointing out that most people would see something glowing and think "oh, pretty", not nessicarily "oh, dangerous".
Don't even have to look in fiction, just read up on the Goiânia accident. People were impressed by it's pretty blue light and didn't question what it was. Several people died and many more received a significant dose of radiation from the material passed around, and that was just from some radioactive cesium chloride. I hope future generations of humans are smart enough that people will recognize that anything giving off a strange glow probably isn't safe, but humans being as they are, I would expect that people will be just as impressed by "pretty glowy metals"!
Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal to take 6 year olds to nudist camps either and they'll see women reveiling more than anything "hidden" in Oblivion.
If you want to say "oh, but those are only on for a few seconds", I say so what? You can see them over and over if you want. Sure, they aren't M rated by any stretch of the imagination, but they're ok anyone 6 or older? If they were looking through the lens of today, I'm not sure they'd appreciate those.
False humility, however, puts you further from the truth. I know what I can do, and I'm not going to be humble when I have no reason to be.
Of course, since you're a random person on an internet forum, I doubt that it would be wise to listen to you at all (mommy says that you might tell me to go to the mall, but I shouldn't listen cause you might be a bad man who wants to touch me).
Oh noes! The horror! I couldn't possibly make a mistake, or at least I can't possibly be humble enough to admit it. Though I'm not the one being a grammar nazi... and since the syntax of the English language hardly needs to be as accurate as a programming language, since most people can deal with minor errors without a second thought... But hey, you're the undisputed grammar master, I'm sure.
"I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?" -Alexander Hamilton
It's very discouraging for a government to only check if the rights specificly said are being infringed upon. While the government takes the interstate commerce and "nessecary and proper" clauses and stretches them to infinity, the 9th Ammendment is almost always ignored. Why does it seem like we'll need Constitutional ammendments to limit what the government wasn't ever given the power to do? I'm not saying that we can ever truly go back to a small government in the libertarian sense, but we could at least not have the government slowly chipping away at our abilities to exercise fundamental human rights, like being reasonable sure that a lawful citizen can communicate privately without fear of being randomly tapped.
There's already provisions for that. It's a 72 hour retroactive warrant. Perfectly legal, and it creates paperwork so that the government can't abuse it without being accountable for. Is that too hard to do? Tough. No one ever said that democratic republics were easy to secure.
1. It didn't take that much time or that many times. It just took the right timing when I actually had a bit of interest at age 4-5 to get number concepts like negative numbers down. Gosh, I know that's so complicated, and we should wait for school to teach it several years down the line, after telling kids repeatedly that you can't subtract bigger numbers from smaller ones.
2. Humility is generally incompatable with real honesty. That said, no, I'm not the smartest kid at my school, however I'd be willing to bet that I'm far enough up there to make claims of my being intelligent.
3. Your biggest specific complaint is that I put an apostrophe in the wrong place in one of my words when I was typing fast? Ohhhhhhh, so scary. I never claimed perfection. The text is far more readable than a lot of what passes for acceptable on Slashdot, so be a grammar nazi for little reason, if you so choose.
What's wrong with having kids with an interest and talent in science/math/english and seeing how far they'll go with it? I'm not talking 2nd graders who get it (then again, I was one of those kids who's parents cared enough to teach me quite a bit when I was younger, so I was way ahead of the curve anyway), but the middle/high school kids? I think we all know that the basic level classes in every subject is more or less a joke, and you don't have to work to get through. Heck, when you get down to it most "honors" classes that schools offer just out of their own curriculum are just slightly more in depth.
The only courses I see that come close to allowing smart kids in high school to come anywhere close to their mental boundaries are the AP courses (although it's still not really college like classes, but it's at least closer). Sadly, most schools either don't offer the courses, or have uninspiring teachers teaching them. Is it an effect of NCLB? Partly, I'm sure. Is it more an effect of schools losing focus on academics in favor of sports and other needless addons? Yes.
I'm soon to be coming out of a school that just spent millions in renovations. Yes, we had a new wing added and a new library, but as far as education is concerned, that's all I've seen. However, we do have a nice new football field, bleachers, stadium style floodlights, a new gym, new lockerrooms, and 8(!) widescreen plasma TVs (4 in the main lobby and 4 in the cafeteria). It's not even as if the TVs were doing anything interesting. Most of the time they're playing a powerpoint with the days announcements, and nothing more.
It wouldn't even be so bad, except that there is a big strip of power outlets and ethernet ports (apparently for our invisible computers?) in all the new classrooms. The problem is, none of them are hooked up! That's right, there are 6 power outlets and ethernet ports in every room that are fully installed and (unless the contractor wasn't on the up and up) should be ready to go... but aren't. Do I even need to get into the unfinished hallway sections that are apparently going to just be left undone.
This isn't even a poor urban school. It's a suburban school that could easily be an educational leader if it put it's mind to it, but it doesn't. Sure, there are some nice things. We've got some AP sciences and AP calc (though only AB), as well as some courses that can earn a few credits through RIT (although the courses don't really get into the meat of anything, which is depressing), but still no courses in computer science or real programming, which I think would be really popular. I don't know where this rant was meant to go, but I've got a bit of pent up rage with my school, and I'm glad I'll be out in less than 2 months.
Yeah, get a large number of states to secede (for example, all the blue states). True, it might be a bit rocky for awhile, but it'll lead to some major political realignment in America.
Can the president open up snail mail without a warrant, presumably without notifying anyone (assuming that they could duplicate the actual letter the mail is in)? I'll bet you a lot more people would have a problem with the president doing that (though it is essentially the same exact thing).
Slashdot Mirror
It's under section 2, which states "The following in particular shall not be regarded as inventions within the meaning of paragraph 1:"
In other words, no.
It shouldn't be about being able to use certain products or being able to do a specific task, the real goal should be teaching the kids to find out how to do things for themselves.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to learn things for himself, and he'll be a hell of a lot more than a fisherman.
Newsflash for you: countries with high standards of living don't produce as many terrorists. Do you think that it's a coincidence that places like Afghanistan, Iran, and much of the Middle East produce terrorists? For the most part, people aren't willing to blow themselves up if they're healthy, educated, and above the poverty line. Instead of blowing up a whole bunch of stuff and making a giant mess that won't be solved before 10+ years of nation building is over, why not feed people, clothe people, and prevent them from dying of diarrhea, all for a fraction of the US military budget.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't be ready to fight those that want to kill us, I just don't think that we should wait until we have people who want to kill us.
Or even 42, if we're going for accuracy.
Except that a terrorist would need the plane to send data that far too, in order for a connection to form. Beyond that, they would need to know the bluetooth address. All this is assuming that the wireless won't be encrypted, which would be so obvious that not even the most idiotic engineer in the world couldn't point that out.
Heck, that's assuming that the US military could free up 1 million soldiers willing to fight fellow Americans. When you get 30% of the population together on something, there are going to be families with fathers vs sons, brothers vs brothers, etc.
The Tripolitan War wasn't that complicated. The US paid for protection from pirates because our navy was terrible. Jefferson didn't like the idea of paying pirates, so we stopped paying them and went to war so our ships would be protected. Seems pretty clear cut to me.
And no, a civil war won't be more pleasant, but war never is. It's the peace, and the freedom gained after the war that will be pleasant (provided those who really care about freedom win).
Technicly, it's home to a replica. The real one was dismantled long ago.
The bright coloration evolved as a way to warn possible preditors, so obviously there can be instinctual responses to certain colorations.
Or because things that are a very eerie shade of any color in nature should generally be avoided. For example, poison dart frogs.
And people in future societies won't be able to either find or create radioactive isotopes of Cesium-137? I was pointing out that most people would see something glowing and think "oh, pretty", not nessicarily "oh, dangerous".
Don't even have to look in fiction, just read up on the Goiânia accident. People were impressed by it's pretty blue light and didn't question what it was. Several people died and many more received a significant dose of radiation from the material passed around, and that was just from some radioactive cesium chloride. I hope future generations of humans are smart enough that people will recognize that anything giving off a strange glow probably isn't safe, but humans being as they are, I would expect that people will be just as impressed by "pretty glowy metals"!
By the time we're able to do that, a bit of radiation poisoning will be the least of our worries.
Last time I checked, it wasn't illegal to take 6 year olds to nudist camps either and they'll see women reveiling more than anything "hidden" in Oblivion.
The ESRB rated Metroid as E. Is this E material: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/Metr onosu-2.png ?
m usfront1.gif ?
The ESRB also rated Super Metroid as E. Is this E either: http://www.metroid-eu.com/supermetroid_endings/sa
If you want to say "oh, but those are only on for a few seconds", I say so what? You can see them over and over if you want. Sure, they aren't M rated by any stretch of the imagination, but they're ok anyone 6 or older? If they were looking through the lens of today, I'm not sure they'd appreciate those.
Donkey Kong wore a loincloth. Just because it doesn't pop out at you with polygons doesn't mean you should make him feel bad, you insensitive clod!
False humility, however, puts you further from the truth. I know what I can do, and I'm not going to be humble when I have no reason to be.
Of course, since you're a random person on an internet forum, I doubt that it would be wise to listen to you at all (mommy says that you might tell me to go to the mall, but I shouldn't listen cause you might be a bad man who wants to touch me).
Oh noes! The horror! I couldn't possibly make a mistake, or at least I can't possibly be humble enough to admit it. Though I'm not the one being a grammar nazi... and since the syntax of the English language hardly needs to be as accurate as a programming language, since most people can deal with minor errors without a second thought... But hey, you're the undisputed grammar master, I'm sure.
"I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?"
-Alexander Hamilton
It's very discouraging for a government to only check if the rights specificly said are being infringed upon. While the government takes the interstate commerce and "nessecary and proper" clauses and stretches them to infinity, the 9th Ammendment is almost always ignored. Why does it seem like we'll need Constitutional ammendments to limit what the government wasn't ever given the power to do? I'm not saying that we can ever truly go back to a small government in the libertarian sense, but we could at least not have the government slowly chipping away at our abilities to exercise fundamental human rights, like being reasonable sure that a lawful citizen can communicate privately without fear of being randomly tapped.
There's already provisions for that. It's a 72 hour retroactive warrant. Perfectly legal, and it creates paperwork so that the government can't abuse it without being accountable for. Is that too hard to do? Tough. No one ever said that democratic republics were easy to secure.
1. It didn't take that much time or that many times. It just took the right timing when I actually had a bit of interest at age 4-5 to get number concepts like negative numbers down. Gosh, I know that's so complicated, and we should wait for school to teach it several years down the line, after telling kids repeatedly that you can't subtract bigger numbers from smaller ones.
2. Humility is generally incompatable with real honesty. That said, no, I'm not the smartest kid at my school, however I'd be willing to bet that I'm far enough up there to make claims of my being intelligent.
3. Your biggest specific complaint is that I put an apostrophe in the wrong place in one of my words when I was typing fast? Ohhhhhhh, so scary. I never claimed perfection. The text is far more readable than a lot of what passes for acceptable on Slashdot, so be a grammar nazi for little reason, if you so choose.
What's wrong with having kids with an interest and talent in science/math/english and seeing how far they'll go with it? I'm not talking 2nd graders who get it (then again, I was one of those kids who's parents cared enough to teach me quite a bit when I was younger, so I was way ahead of the curve anyway), but the middle/high school kids? I think we all know that the basic level classes in every subject is more or less a joke, and you don't have to work to get through. Heck, when you get down to it most "honors" classes that schools offer just out of their own curriculum are just slightly more in depth.
The only courses I see that come close to allowing smart kids in high school to come anywhere close to their mental boundaries are the AP courses (although it's still not really college like classes, but it's at least closer). Sadly, most schools either don't offer the courses, or have uninspiring teachers teaching them. Is it an effect of NCLB? Partly, I'm sure. Is it more an effect of schools losing focus on academics in favor of sports and other needless addons? Yes.
I'm soon to be coming out of a school that just spent millions in renovations. Yes, we had a new wing added and a new library, but as far as education is concerned, that's all I've seen. However, we do have a nice new football field, bleachers, stadium style floodlights, a new gym, new lockerrooms, and 8(!) widescreen plasma TVs (4 in the main lobby and 4 in the cafeteria). It's not even as if the TVs were doing anything interesting. Most of the time they're playing a powerpoint with the days announcements, and nothing more.
It wouldn't even be so bad, except that there is a big strip of power outlets and ethernet ports (apparently for our invisible computers?) in all the new classrooms. The problem is, none of them are hooked up! That's right, there are 6 power outlets and ethernet ports in every room that are fully installed and (unless the contractor wasn't on the up and up) should be ready to go... but aren't. Do I even need to get into the unfinished hallway sections that are apparently going to just be left undone.
This isn't even a poor urban school. It's a suburban school that could easily be an educational leader if it put it's mind to it, but it doesn't. Sure, there are some nice things. We've got some AP sciences and AP calc (though only AB), as well as some courses that can earn a few credits through RIT (although the courses don't really get into the meat of anything, which is depressing), but still no courses in computer science or real programming, which I think would be really popular. I don't know where this rant was meant to go, but I've got a bit of pent up rage with my school, and I'm glad I'll be out in less than 2 months.
Yeah, get a large number of states to secede (for example, all the blue states). True, it might be a bit rocky for awhile, but it'll lead to some major political realignment in America.
Can the president open up snail mail without a warrant, presumably without notifying anyone (assuming that they could duplicate the actual letter the mail is in)? I'll bet you a lot more people would have a problem with the president doing that (though it is essentially the same exact thing).
It still happens today on talk radio, actually, and not just the Paul Harvey show.