I guess you would be right about Esperanto on a logical point of view, I was rather thinking in terms of the worldwide cost of changing the language, so then taking the most used one is the best option.
I guess you're speaking of the "Système International", yep, I know that, and before you even think about it, I didn't check it up online. Ok, they started the metric system, but is that the reason why France would have to change their language ? when really most of the world (not all, but the majority) decided to take the system willingly just because it was so sensible.
First of all France, what have they got to do with this ?
One measurement system would be fantastic, if only to facilitate international exchanges (check out the mess in the international commodities or metals markets for an example) it is even more useful than having every country drive on the right. But as for languages, not only it is a very strong part of national identity, but it is also much more difficult to change. And if you would imagine taking one language for all countries, you probably should take Chinese or Spanish.
P.S.: as a side point, don't you find that the metric system is actually quite logical ? going from distance to weight through volumes and all that just with base 10 conversions ?
Well the average cost would definitely go down, increase production and as the person above mentioned the fixed costs will be lower for every single computer (the average cost).
For a profit maximizing company the marginal profit (basically the price) must equal the marginal cost (the cost of producing that last computer), but as this would not be done to maximize profits the objective is to equal total cost and total profit, meaning that the average total cost must equal the average profit (equal to the price in this case). This allows the marginal cost to be above the $10 tag.
So getting rid of all that economic jargon, basically because the computer would not be produced for profit the quantity produced can be larger and the price be lower than the actual cost of producing the last computer.
Also I don't know why would you really need much of a battery, because I imagine the reason why they want to have laptops is not for using on a bus or train but for easier transport from one work place to another, both places having some sort of electricity available. The battery would only need to cover temporary irregularities in supply (if even)
It's interesting that their primary response is to shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message. We're not hearing from the teachers and administrators who get the highest marks on the website, are we? Just the bad ones who are trying to save their jobs not by improving but through censorship. Definitely, people usually react strongly against something that is not in their favor, but what I do not understand is why would this actually be a question of "saving jobs", because I don't believe that one could call a bunch of teenagers the most objective point of view, but on the other hand it is a valuable feedback. For example there is this one teacher which was really strict on us while I was a teenager and at the moment we really didn't like him, but looking back that was probably the best teacher we've ever had.
In fact, the teachers should see this feedback as some amazing tool, allowing them to modify their behavior in order for the student-teacher interaction to be improved; especially as we know that the main problem teachers have is usually difficult students, misunderstanding, etc. Of course the tool must be used with caution as anything where people are anonymous, but it nonetheless give a idea what the general feeling is.
On another line of thought, schools are providing a service to the people by educating them and like every company they are trying to satisfy their workers and clients, the workers being satisfied by good wages, nice working conditions, long holidays, while the clients should be satisfied by good courses, good working conditions, and good teachers. The main disadvantage schools have compared to companies is that they do not actually loose clients when the service is bad, so the only way they have to keep a check on the quality (read: usefulness) of schooling is to see what do the clients (students) believe of the service that is provided to them.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you would be right about Esperanto on a logical point of view, I was rather thinking in terms of the worldwide cost of changing the language, so then taking the most used one is the best option.
I guess you're speaking of the "Système International", yep, I know that, and before you even think about it, I didn't check it up online. Ok, they started the metric system, but is that the reason why France would have to change their language ? when really most of the world (not all, but the majority) decided to take the system willingly just because it was so sensible.
So you want to be totally fair ?
First of all France, what have they got to do with this ?
One measurement system would be fantastic, if only to facilitate international exchanges (check out the mess in the international commodities or metals markets for an example) it is even more useful than having every country drive on the right. But as for languages, not only it is a very strong part of national identity, but it is also much more difficult to change. And if you would imagine taking one language for all countries, you probably should take Chinese or Spanish.
P.S.: as a side point, don't you find that the metric system is actually quite logical ? going from distance to weight through volumes and all that just with base 10 conversions ?
For a profit maximizing company the marginal profit (basically the price) must equal the marginal cost (the cost of producing that last computer), but as this would not be done to maximize profits the objective is to equal total cost and total profit, meaning that the average total cost must equal the average profit (equal to the price in this case). This allows the marginal cost to be above the $10 tag.
So getting rid of all that economic jargon, basically because the computer would not be produced for profit the quantity produced can be larger and the price be lower than the actual cost of producing the last computer.
Also I don't know why would you really need much of a battery, because I imagine the reason why they want to have laptops is not for using on a bus or train but for easier transport from one work place to another, both places having some sort of electricity available. The battery would only need to cover temporary irregularities in supply (if even)
In fact, the teachers should see this feedback as some amazing tool, allowing them to modify their behavior in order for the student-teacher interaction to be improved; especially as we know that the main problem teachers have is usually difficult students, misunderstanding, etc. Of course the tool must be used with caution as anything where people are anonymous, but it nonetheless give a idea what the general feeling is.
On another line of thought, schools are providing a service to the people by educating them and like every company they are trying to satisfy their workers and clients, the workers being satisfied by good wages, nice working conditions, long holidays, while the clients should be satisfied by good courses, good working conditions, and good teachers. The main disadvantage schools have compared to companies is that they do not actually loose clients when the service is bad, so the only way they have to keep a check on the quality (read: usefulness) of schooling is to see what do the clients (students) believe of the service that is provided to them.