Eh, One of my Engineering teachers did Open Book tests one term as a test. The class average was over 90% on all of them.
We're all pretty bright students, but that's not an accurate measurement of our abilities. He's trying to decide whether to keep the open book tests, and just try to make the tested material harder - or go back to closed-book tests. I'm pretty torn on what to recommend.
[quote]I said nothing about being safe behind immobile defenses first off, that's sheer fabrication.[/quote]
Yes, you did. You just don't know what the words you're using mean.
[quote]Land-based aircraft are hardly immobile. Littoral vessels are hardly immobile. Hunter-killer submarines are not immobile, and confining them to the vicinity of your coast rather than stationing them all around the world does not make them so. Land based missile launchers are not normally immobile either, and there are plenty of other options.[/quote]
Why are you recommending these things when you think merely a coast guard is good enough?
You're calling for a Navy that just happens to stay near our shores, the coast guard is smaller and cheaper because it doesn't use the fancy expensive toys like the Navy does.
The point at which a fetus turns from "a clump of cells" to "a person" is defined pretty arbitrarily, and I'm happy with the de-facto standard of the third trimester of pregnancy.
You could use the same logic to proclaim contraception or masturbation as murder, and therefore just as bad as Al Qaeda, simply by going back even further in the reproductive process.
Gravitational time dilation operates separately from velocity time dilation. I don't fully understand it myself, but GP is correct, and there's a pretty good write-up on wikipedia.
The blind faith GP is talking about refers to the supernatural claims of religions. I'm willing to accept that there was someone named Jesus who founded a religion and was crucified by the romans just the same as I'm willing to accept that there's a man named Bobby Henderson who wrote an open letter to the Kansas board of Education, founding a religion based on the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
The fact that both of these people existed doesn't provide any evidence for the religions they founded.
Honestly, I feel there's a certain standard that Americans have set for ourselves that I must maintain while travelling. If a foreigner meets an American who is not loud, obnoxious, or insulting in some way, then they have been robbed of the true American experience.
Hi, I'm in my third year of an EE curriculum, and know plenty of math. It's useful for me, and will continue to be in my chosen profession.
I still don't think calculus should be a required topic in high school. Optional? Yes. Required? No.
There's an opportunity cost to every requirement, it takes away from time that could be spent on other subjects. Hell, math courses take a disproportionately large amount of time compared to others - the term I took calc 1, the homework and studying for that single class took more of my time than every other class I was taking combined! This is from someone who enjoys math and is good at it! I can't imagine it would be like for student to just wants to be an artist or something.
That's a strong argument in favor of math up through Algebra, English up through being able to write a basic research paper, History up through having a basic overview of the past 2000 years, etc. I'm not arguing to take it out of high school entirely, just that it shouldn't be required.
Calculus is, IMHO, just past the line between "good for everyone" and "only good for people specializing in math-related subjects."
Calculus just isn't useful to most people graduating high school. Learning the mathematical definition of a limit isn't going to benefit, say, a future baker in any way. why teach it to them?
Do you have mischievous housemates/co-workers (depending on where you're posting from)? It's a common prank to change the custom dictionary of a spell checker to include things like this.
I tend to wrap history courses in with the rest of the "leftist propaganda courses" because the introductory ones don't tend to teach you anything you didn't already learn in high school, and consist of a blatantly propagandized version of history.
Fine Arts, Humanities, and Social Science classes rarely have any content you couldn't learn by yourself, but they represent almost an entire year of your life (~23 credits, assuming 30/year full time status), during which time you are paying possibly tens of thousands of dollars in tuition/books/fees. .
Lawyers might just think the kid is from Sweden, hoping he's an American lying about his physical whereabouts to prevent them from even asking questions.
In any event, if they just throw the first sentence of that confession in front of a judge:
"I have been sharing a whole load of your files... on every torrent site like Purena, Empornium, Kickasstorrents etc"
And it'd be at the very least enough to cause an American major headaches.
Assuming the kid really does live in Sweden though, American courts don't have jurisdiction. He can just kinda've ignore them. Might get in his way of ever coming to the United States for a job or vacation or whatever, but that's about it.
Insisting on putting forth an ugly face is no more of a good idea than insisting on wearing old, tattered, smelly clothing, or neglecting any other part of your appearance the way we nerds are often guilty of doing. You'll be repulsing the "deep" men along with the shallow ones, and only end up attracting ones who are desperate or have low standards.
Also, you're in your bra in that one picture. That attracts men who think you're easy, which is usually the same sort of shallow person you say you're trying to avoid. Seriously, WTF?
Internet dating is a pretty terrible way to meet people. Try heading off to nerd events (school, conventions, whatever interests you) - the guy:girl ratio is often around 5:1, and you'd be more attractive than most nerd girls if you didn't have that hideous mouthbreather look on your face, so chances are good to find someone that way.
One of the most valuable lessons I learned is how to get things accomplished despite an overwhelming bureaucracy. It's necessary to manipulate the system just to get your job done sometimes, and it doesn't surprise me at all that this extends to the upper echelons of the military.
I set up the dilemma to argue a point, not prove an absolute moral law.
GP was of the opinion that manipulating your superiors is always the morally wrong choice to make, and while I agree to that in most circumstances (for example, in TFA the main accusation is that the General in question was doing this to further his career, not help his men) - it's a morally wrong choice to make, there are circumstances where it would be the right choice.
In the perfect war, the enemy would surrender before the fighting even began, and there would be no deaths at all.
Failing that, the idea is to minimize your own casualties, minimize civilian casualties, and maximize enemy casualties.
Killing the enemy isn't the begin all and end all of it (the enemy should almost always be allowed to retreat, you should always accept a surrender in good faith, etc.) - but you should never shy away from ensuring the maximum number of enemy combatants are killed.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, One of my Engineering teachers did Open Book tests one term as a test. The class average was over 90% on all of them.
We're all pretty bright students, but that's not an accurate measurement of our abilities. He's trying to decide whether to keep the open book tests, and just try to make the tested material harder - or go back to closed-book tests. I'm pretty torn on what to recommend.
[quote]I said nothing about being safe behind immobile defenses first off, that's sheer fabrication.[/quote]
Yes, you did. You just don't know what the words you're using mean.
[quote]Land-based aircraft are hardly immobile. Littoral vessels are hardly immobile. Hunter-killer submarines are not immobile, and confining them to the vicinity of your coast rather than stationing them all around the world does not make them so. Land based missile launchers are not normally immobile either, and there are plenty of other options.[/quote]
Why are you recommending these things when you think merely a coast guard is good enough?
You're calling for a Navy that just happens to stay near our shores, the coast guard is smaller and cheaper because it doesn't use the fancy expensive toys like the Navy does.
You keep making the same joke, and it's just not funny.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Replace [b]Hitler[/b] with [b]Al Qaeda[/b]
Abortion != Murder.
The point at which a fetus turns from "a clump of cells" to "a person" is defined pretty arbitrarily, and I'm happy with the de-facto standard of the third trimester of pregnancy.
You could use the same logic to proclaim contraception or masturbation as murder, and therefore just as bad as Al Qaeda, simply by going back even further in the reproductive process.
WTF? Comparing Planned Parenthood to Al Qaeda?
This is like a modern-day godwin's law situation, you've automatically lost the argument.
Gravitational time dilation operates separately from velocity time dilation. I don't fully understand it myself, but GP is correct, and there's a pretty good write-up on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation
The blind faith GP is talking about refers to the supernatural claims of religions. I'm willing to accept that there was someone named Jesus who founded a religion and was crucified by the romans just the same as I'm willing to accept that there's a man named Bobby Henderson who wrote an open letter to the Kansas board of Education, founding a religion based on the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
The fact that both of these people existed doesn't provide any evidence for the religions they founded.
big bucks exist in translating for legal documents.
Obviously, both of you are living in different boxes, and hurling insults at each other like mad homeless people in an alley.
Honestly, I feel there's a certain standard that Americans have set for ourselves that I must maintain while travelling. If a foreigner meets an American who is not loud, obnoxious, or insulting in some way, then they have been robbed of the true American experience.
This is indeed news to me!
Good to know.
Have you ever been to Afghanistan?
The only thing people there are plundering is American Tax dollars. Afghanis are collateral damage.
Hi, I'm in my third year of an EE curriculum, and know plenty of math. It's useful for me, and will continue to be in my chosen profession.
I still don't think calculus should be a required topic in high school. Optional? Yes. Required? No.
There's an opportunity cost to every requirement, it takes away from time that could be spent on other subjects. Hell, math courses take a disproportionately large amount of time compared to others - the term I took calc 1, the homework and studying for that single class took more of my time than every other class I was taking combined! This is from someone who enjoys math and is good at it! I can't imagine it would be like for student to just wants to be an artist or something.
That's a strong argument in favor of math up through Algebra, English up through being able to write a basic research paper, History up through having a basic overview of the past 2000 years, etc. I'm not arguing to take it out of high school entirely, just that it shouldn't be required.
Calculus is, IMHO, just past the line between "good for everyone" and "only good for people specializing in math-related subjects."
Calculus just isn't useful to most people graduating high school. Learning the mathematical definition of a limit isn't going to benefit, say, a future baker in any way. why teach it to them?
Do you have mischievous housemates/co-workers (depending on where you're posting from)? It's a common prank to change the custom dictionary of a spell checker to include things like this.
I tend to wrap history courses in with the rest of the "leftist propaganda courses" because the introductory ones don't tend to teach you anything you didn't already learn in high school, and consist of a blatantly propagandized version of history.
Fine Arts, Humanities, and Social Science classes rarely have any content you couldn't learn by yourself, but they represent almost an entire year of your life (~23 credits, assuming 30/year full time status), during which time you are paying possibly tens of thousands of dollars in tuition/books/fees.
.
Stop using that font.
Lawyers might just think the kid is from Sweden, hoping he's an American lying about his physical whereabouts to prevent them from even asking questions.
In any event, if they just throw the first sentence of that confession in front of a judge:
"I have been sharing a whole load of your files... on every torrent site like Purena, Empornium, Kickasstorrents etc"
And it'd be at the very least enough to cause an American major headaches.
Assuming the kid really does live in Sweden though, American courts don't have jurisdiction. He can just kinda've ignore them. Might get in his way of ever coming to the United States for a job or vacation or whatever, but that's about it.
dogma should be challenged and removed wherever possible.
But that's just anti-dogma dogma! You're as much an unthinking drone as theists you rail against!
Insisting on putting forth an ugly face is no more of a good idea than insisting on wearing old, tattered, smelly clothing, or neglecting any other part of your appearance the way we nerds are often guilty of doing. You'll be repulsing the "deep" men along with the shallow ones, and only end up attracting ones who are desperate or have low standards.
Also, you're in your bra in that one picture. That attracts men who think you're easy, which is usually the same sort of shallow person you say you're trying to avoid. Seriously, WTF?
Internet dating is a pretty terrible way to meet people. Try heading off to nerd events (school, conventions, whatever interests you) - the guy:girl ratio is often around 5:1, and you'd be more attractive than most nerd girls if you didn't have that hideous mouthbreather look on your face, so chances are good to find someone that way.
If they can demonstrate a reasonable need for a search, they can acquire a warrant, and do all of this completely legally.
Hi, I spent four years in the military.
One of the most valuable lessons I learned is how to get things accomplished despite an overwhelming bureaucracy. It's necessary to manipulate the system just to get your job done sometimes, and it doesn't surprise me at all that this extends to the upper echelons of the military.
I set up the dilemma to argue a point, not prove an absolute moral law.
GP was of the opinion that manipulating your superiors is always the morally wrong choice to make, and while I agree to that in most circumstances (for example, in TFA the main accusation is that the General in question was doing this to further his career, not help his men) - it's a morally wrong choice to make, there are circumstances where it would be the right choice.
In the perfect war, the enemy would surrender before the fighting even began, and there would be no deaths at all.
Failing that, the idea is to minimize your own casualties, minimize civilian casualties, and maximize enemy casualties.
Killing the enemy isn't the begin all and end all of it (the enemy should almost always be allowed to retreat, you should always accept a surrender in good faith, etc.) - but you should never shy away from ensuring the maximum number of enemy combatants are killed.