Oh, wait, this took place on the Obama adminstration's watch?
Not another one. No, this didn't happen during the Obama administration's watch. It happened the first week of May, 2017. Someone else tried to use the "Obama's fault" card yesterday when Ajit Pai first admitted that his agency had not been hacked. How many times does this have to be shot down before you guys give up trying to lie about it?
Well, at least now we know why anchor baby Ajit Pai decided to "come clean" about the hoax yesterday. He knew the proverbial jig was up and he figured he'd do a partial reveal before he was exposed.
It's become the signature move of this degenerate administration: get out ahead of the bad news and try to blunt the damage.
For himself, without making any such profession, he was content to believe that those who accepted his views would play their parts as good and true friends to himself and one another their lives long.
I see. So this would indicate that while he didn't have a specific fee, he put out the tip jar and expected his students to support him as "good and true friends". I've known people like that. After graduation, one slept on my couch for almost a month before I had to throw his ass out for eating all my cereal and drinking juice straight from the container.
Plus, it seems to contradict another passage from Xenophon that I just don't have the energy or will to look up right now. But I will yield to your view that education is a waste, since some guys said that's what another guy said 2500 years ago.
This won't end well. Based on the news stories of how well most facial recognition works on African Americans it will probably only allow one black person to vote and ID the rest as the same person.
It is in Xenophon's account of the trial that we learn that Socrates used his poverty as proof that he wasn't even a teacher.
It is also in Xenophon's account that Socrates got paid for teaching. Now maybe the situation was the same back then and teachers were criminally underpaid, but your assertion that Socrates had such scorn for education that he refused to take money for teaching is somewhat weakened by the fact that Socrates took money for teaching.
I hate to repeat myself, but a classical liberal arts education might have helped you make a more convincing argument without contradicting yourself and relying on admittedly weak sources. And the ability to make a convincing argument is something that might serve an engineer well when dealing with teams and corporate hierarchies.
I even explained the level to which it was already formalized, and gave evidence that he didn't even support that much organization. Seems like a weak argument you're making.
Since there are no original sources on Socrates, we only have the word of someone you said is unreliable, Plato. Your evidence is what's known as hearsay, and in this case, it's the hearsay of someone who cannot be trusted.
I appreciate fan fiction as much as the next guy, but you should admit that's all the evidence you have about what Socrates believed and what he didn't believe.
Oh, and are you calling Xenophon a liar about Socrates getting paid for his teaching?
he was clearly not a booster of formal education, and his only known statements about it are critical.
How could he have been a booster of formal education? It didn't really didn't become formalized in Greece until after Socrates died. I mean, yeah, rich people would send their boys to learn the alphabet and participate in some games, but that was about it. Girls weren't allowed, which probably would have suited Socrates just fine.
It's like saying Orville Wright wasn't a big booster of credit cards with mileage-plus rewards.
Plus, we don't really know what Socrates said or felt about anything, because we only have the word of his students. Maybe if he'd been a booster of formal education he would have written some things down himself instead of leaving it up to his least reliable student to tell us what he thought.
Regarding whether or not Socrates accepted payment for his teaching, there's a fair bit of disagreement from his actual students. Xenophon says yes and Plato says no. Since you have already established Plato as an unreliable narrator, maybe we should just believe Xenophon, no? Maybe Socrates wasn't against formal education at all, and the whole story is just, as you say, bombast on the part of Plato who was inclined to just make shit up. Maybe Socrates was actually just in it for the money and the poontang.
You might have learned to ask these questions yourself if you'd had a classical liberal arts education in the humanities.
This happened in 2015. Trump got elected 2 years later. Nice try Hillary.
Don't just sit there and lie. The supposed hack they're talking about occurred during the first week of May, 2017. Here is the story as originally reported right fucking here.
Is there a single agency, department, or aide in this degenerate president's administration that is not steeped in corruption and lies?
I would feel better if there was, because otherwise I'd have to begrudgingly acknowledge that Trump is history's greatest evil genius. I mean, he must have accidentally hired an honest person, right? I mean, even his campaign was a parade of reprobates and sleaze. It just never stops.
Perhaps academic pursuits are not, therefore, ever wise.
I don't know, Socrates sounds like a big fan of education and teaching.
"“While I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy, exhorting any one whom I meet and saying to him after my manner: You, my friend – a citizen of the great and mighty Athens – are you not ashamed of heaping up the greatest amount of money and honor, and reputation, and caring so little about wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul, which you never regard at all?"
Vivek Wadhwa is an adjunct professor and distinguished fellow in the Integrated Innovation Institute at Carnegie Mellon University's Silicon Valley Campus.
Allow me to explain what "adjunct professor and distinguished fellow" means at this level. It means that he's made a bundle of money in private industry and schools are now throwing money and titles at him because he's just that good at what he does.
Don't confuse Wadhwa with some adjunct at a junior college making $6,000 per semester with no benefits.
The bank then owns it and has to sell it off for a pittance
Now you're getting to the crux of the financial crisis. See, it wasn't the banks that had to "sell it off for a pittance", it was the secondary mortgage holder, who had bought the mortgage bundled with other mortgages, then insured that bundle via credit default swaps. The banks lost nothing when the house was "sold for a pittance". And since the house's price had been inflated in a bubble caused by this mortgage "pump and dump" scheme, don't you think that "pittance" might have been closer to the real value of the home?
You must never let yourself believe that any bank lost any money in the mortgage crisis. It is not historically accurate.
Humanity still escapes any significant scientific classification and to this date the actual location, mechanism, or source of "consciousness" is unknown
OK, I can see where you're confused. You don't understand what the study of "Humanities" means. It's not about the study of consciousness or what forms preferences. It is a comprehensive approach to understanding how things work via the study of how people describe their universe and their experience. Philosophy, Linguistics, Languages, History, Archaeology, even many areas of Mathematics, are all part of Humanities programs, along with Literature, Art, Music, the Historical Foundations of Science. Chances are, you learned about the scientific method from a class in the Humanities program. Logic is taught in Humanities.
Can you think of any fields in technology where you might find value in the study of Linguistics? How about Logic?
This is not a reasonable or even a wise academic pursuit.
Note to the younger Slashdotters out there: When someone proudly proclaims their ignorance, believe them. Being proud of not knowing, naming entire fields that have always been part of a classical education as "not worth studying" is the hallmark of someone for whom ignorance is a worthy goal.
You do realize that where they have taught, what certifications or accreditation they have, or what their ideas are, does not preclude them from saying stupid things.
Yes, but that's not really pertinent to the discussion, now is it? Shanghai Bill said, "the author's probably some liberal arts major". I presented evidence that the author was in fact, a distinguished faculty member at some of the top engineering schools. That's it. You want to change the topic at hand, you are welcome to do so, but it might be more appropriate to start a new thread. Which is something you would have learned in a freshman composition course in a motherfucking liberal arts program
do you know for a fact that this poster is not as known as the other?
Absolutely. I invite you to examine the data for yourself. ShanghaiBill's been posting here for a good long time. His comment history is publicly available. I can say with a 98% confidence interval that if ShanghaiBill is known for anything, it's something that caused him to spend 90 days in a country jail somewhere in the Florida panhandle.
The article, presumably written by a liberal arts major
The author is an Engineering professor. He is a Distinguished Fellow at Harvard Law School and Carnegie Mellon University’s College of Engineering. He has taught at Duke, Stanford and Emory.
See, this is why liberal arts and the humanities are so important. If you'd studied them, you might have thought to check the motherfucking article before spouting off about how this guy is just some liberal arts loser.
extols the importance of "critical thinking", yet is just a string of conjectures based on no evidence, displaying a clear lack of critical thinking.
I would think that someone who jumped straight to, "he studied macrame" without even glancing at the article might not want to throw any stones about "critical thinking".
If they hadn't take a loan they couldn't afford in the first place
That's not what happened. I can't believe we're barely a decade past the financial cataclysm of 2007-08 and even after stacks of books have been written, a dozen ore more documentaries and a couple of blockbuster hollywood films (one that won an oscar), we still have people who don't understand what happened with the housing crash, and why the blame is not on the borrowers any more than you would blame the victim of a violent mugging.
The amount of document fraud perpetrated by Wells Fargo and their secondary-mortgage customers and servicers was just unbelievable. I recommend some of the investigative journalism of an economist and former bank executive named "Yves Smith", who writes the Naked Capitalism blog. Without her work, even these meager attempts at holding the banks accountable would not have been possible. Her book, ECONNED is taught in schools now.
Judging from the woman with the impressively-painted nails who sat in front of me on the subway in Chicago a few weeks ago, I would have to say no. Although I do hope that she eventually learns that you can use your indoor voice when you're on your smartphone.
It's funny how these large-scale "computer glitches" seem to favor the bank and not the consumer.
They lost homes, and now Wells Fargo is required to pay them each $20,000. If Wells Fargo accidentally put money into my account, do you think they'd settle for me returning dimes on the dollar?
We lost the internet, and it's time we accept that and move on.
Was it ever really ours? Does anyone really believe that it wasn't seen as a mechanism of control and surveillance from the very beginning? I'm thinking back to the Usenet days, and there were definitely cops hanging around there from the beginning. I know this because I've met some of them.
If you're on the internet and have created some dim corner where you think nobody's watching, you can be sure you're being watched.
We never lost the internet because we never really had the internet. Why would you think something that sprang from DARPA would be a platform for liberty?
Someone writes this article right after corporate America Starbucks (crypto will be first worldwide currency) and microsoft double down on blockchain and nyse owner has a huge announcement to back bitcoin with real purchases for futures. You guys are just funny with the trolls. In five years you will be left in the dust.
Translation: "I bought bitcoin at $19000 with borrowed money and now it's under $7000. If it will only get back to like $12000, I'll be able to get out and not have to sell my car."
Slashdot Mirror
Not another one. No, this didn't happen during the Obama administration's watch. It happened the first week of May, 2017. Someone else tried to use the "Obama's fault" card yesterday when Ajit Pai first admitted that his agency had not been hacked. How many times does this have to be shot down before you guys give up trying to lie about it?
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
Here's the story from last July, so you can track Ajit Pai's weasily and pitiful lie in real time.
https://gizmodo.com/fcc-now-sa...
And here's the Slashdot story from yesterday.
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
Well, at least now we know why anchor baby Ajit Pai decided to "come clean" about the hoax yesterday. He knew the proverbial jig was up and he figured he'd do a partial reveal before he was exposed.
It's become the signature move of this degenerate administration: get out ahead of the bad news and try to blunt the damage.
I see. So this would indicate that while he didn't have a specific fee, he put out the tip jar and expected his students to support him as "good and true friends". I've known people like that. After graduation, one slept on my couch for almost a month before I had to throw his ass out for eating all my cereal and drinking juice straight from the container.
Plus, it seems to contradict another passage from Xenophon that I just don't have the energy or will to look up right now. But I will yield to your view that education is a waste, since some guys said that's what another guy said 2500 years ago.
For West Virginians, that's a feature, not a bug.
It is also in Xenophon's account that Socrates got paid for teaching. Now maybe the situation was the same back then and teachers were criminally underpaid, but your assertion that Socrates had such scorn for education that he refused to take money for teaching is somewhat weakened by the fact that Socrates took money for teaching.
I hate to repeat myself, but a classical liberal arts education might have helped you make a more convincing argument without contradicting yourself and relying on admittedly weak sources. And the ability to make a convincing argument is something that might serve an engineer well when dealing with teams and corporate hierarchies.
Since there are no original sources on Socrates, we only have the word of someone you said is unreliable, Plato. Your evidence is what's known as hearsay, and in this case, it's the hearsay of someone who cannot be trusted.
I appreciate fan fiction as much as the next guy, but you should admit that's all the evidence you have about what Socrates believed and what he didn't believe.
Oh, and are you calling Xenophon a liar about Socrates getting paid for his teaching?
How could he have been a booster of formal education? It didn't really didn't become formalized in Greece until after Socrates died. I mean, yeah, rich people would send their boys to learn the alphabet and participate in some games, but that was about it. Girls weren't allowed, which probably would have suited Socrates just fine.
It's like saying Orville Wright wasn't a big booster of credit cards with mileage-plus rewards.
Plus, we don't really know what Socrates said or felt about anything, because we only have the word of his students. Maybe if he'd been a booster of formal education he would have written some things down himself instead of leaving it up to his least reliable student to tell us what he thought.
Regarding whether or not Socrates accepted payment for his teaching, there's a fair bit of disagreement from his actual students. Xenophon says yes and Plato says no. Since you have already established Plato as an unreliable narrator, maybe we should just believe Xenophon, no? Maybe Socrates wasn't against formal education at all, and the whole story is just, as you say, bombast on the part of Plato who was inclined to just make shit up. Maybe Socrates was actually just in it for the money and the poontang.
You might have learned to ask these questions yourself if you'd had a classical liberal arts education in the humanities.
Don't just sit there and lie. The supposed hack they're talking about occurred during the first week of May, 2017. Here is the story as originally reported right fucking here.
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
And the original:
http://thehill.com/policy/tech...
No, he's still president.
Is there a single agency, department, or aide in this degenerate president's administration that is not steeped in corruption and lies?
I would feel better if there was, because otherwise I'd have to begrudgingly acknowledge that Trump is history's greatest evil genius. I mean, he must have accidentally hired an honest person, right? I mean, even his campaign was a parade of reprobates and sleaze. It just never stops.
I don't know, Socrates sounds like a big fan of education and teaching.
Allow me to explain what "adjunct professor and distinguished fellow" means at this level. It means that he's made a bundle of money in private industry and schools are now throwing money and titles at him because he's just that good at what he does.
Don't confuse Wadhwa with some adjunct at a junior college making $6,000 per semester with no benefits.
I am also an expert on moo shu pork and General Tso's chicken.
The bank then owns it and has to sell it off for a pittance
Now you're getting to the crux of the financial crisis. See, it wasn't the banks that had to "sell it off for a pittance", it was the secondary mortgage holder, who had bought the mortgage bundled with other mortgages, then insured that bundle via credit default swaps. The banks lost nothing when the house was "sold for a pittance". And since the house's price had been inflated in a bubble caused by this mortgage "pump and dump" scheme, don't you think that "pittance" might have been closer to the real value of the home?
You must never let yourself believe that any bank lost any money in the mortgage crisis. It is not historically accurate.
OK, I can see where you're confused. You don't understand what the study of "Humanities" means. It's not about the study of consciousness or what forms preferences. It is a comprehensive approach to understanding how things work via the study of how people describe their universe and their experience. Philosophy, Linguistics, Languages, History, Archaeology, even many areas of Mathematics, are all part of Humanities programs, along with Literature, Art, Music, the Historical Foundations of Science. Chances are, you learned about the scientific method from a class in the Humanities program. Logic is taught in Humanities.
Can you think of any fields in technology where you might find value in the study of Linguistics? How about Logic?
Note to the younger Slashdotters out there: When someone proudly proclaims their ignorance, believe them. Being proud of not knowing, naming entire fields that have always been part of a classical education as "not worth studying" is the hallmark of someone for whom ignorance is a worthy goal.
Yes, but that's not really pertinent to the discussion, now is it? Shanghai Bill said, "the author's probably some liberal arts major". I presented evidence that the author was in fact, a distinguished faculty member at some of the top engineering schools. That's it. You want to change the topic at hand, you are welcome to do so, but it might be more appropriate to start a new thread. Which is something you would have learned in a freshman composition course in a motherfucking liberal arts program
Absolutely. I invite you to examine the data for yourself. ShanghaiBill's been posting here for a good long time. His comment history is publicly available. I can say with a 98% confidence interval that if ShanghaiBill is known for anything, it's something that caused him to spend 90 days in a country jail somewhere in the Florida panhandle.
And none of them would disagree with the thesis of this article.
The author is an Engineering professor. He is a Distinguished Fellow at Harvard Law School and Carnegie Mellon University’s College of Engineering. He has taught at Duke, Stanford and Emory.
See, this is why liberal arts and the humanities are so important. If you'd studied them, you might have thought to check the motherfucking article before spouting off about how this guy is just some liberal arts loser.
I would think that someone who jumped straight to, "he studied macrame" without even glancing at the article might not want to throw any stones about "critical thinking".
That's not what happened. I can't believe we're barely a decade past the financial cataclysm of 2007-08 and even after stacks of books have been written, a dozen ore more documentaries and a couple of blockbuster hollywood films (one that won an oscar), we still have people who don't understand what happened with the housing crash, and why the blame is not on the borrowers any more than you would blame the victim of a violent mugging.
The amount of document fraud perpetrated by Wells Fargo and their secondary-mortgage customers and servicers was just unbelievable. I recommend some of the investigative journalism of an economist and former bank executive named "Yves Smith", who writes the Naked Capitalism blog. Without her work, even these meager attempts at holding the banks accountable would not have been possible. Her book, ECONNED is taught in schools now.
Judging from the woman with the impressively-painted nails who sat in front of me on the subway in Chicago a few weeks ago, I would have to say no. Although I do hope that she eventually learns that you can use your indoor voice when you're on your smartphone.
It's funny how these large-scale "computer glitches" seem to favor the bank and not the consumer.
They lost homes, and now Wells Fargo is required to pay them each $20,000. If Wells Fargo accidentally put money into my account, do you think they'd settle for me returning dimes on the dollar?
Sears Roebuck, ftw.
Was it ever really ours? Does anyone really believe that it wasn't seen as a mechanism of control and surveillance from the very beginning? I'm thinking back to the Usenet days, and there were definitely cops hanging around there from the beginning. I know this because I've met some of them.
If you're on the internet and have created some dim corner where you think nobody's watching, you can be sure you're being watched.
We never lost the internet because we never really had the internet. Why would you think something that sprang from DARPA would be a platform for liberty?
Translation: "I bought bitcoin at $19000 with borrowed money and now it's under $7000. If it will only get back to like $12000, I'll be able to get out and not have to sell my car."
https://youtu.be/9AajslFuPro