calbiterol

Yeah, and here I was waiting for something more...

[hide](mathematical)[/hide]

challenging.

Mrs. Tilly loves food but hates to eat it.

Wow, I feel slow. I still don't get 14.

3.8e8m/3e8m/s x 2 = 2.5s Add in some relays and you get maybe 3 seconds, and that's round-trip, not one-way.

First, cut me some slack. I was trying to pull a number out of my memory that I have heard maybe once or twice in my life, and certainly not within the last few years. Second, that isn't the point - my point was, accidents can happen very quickly, and a delay can be prohibitive to preventing them.

You interact with a computer on your desktop, but it runs many things automatically. The same can be done with equipment. Limited external control with local processing, like sensors to engage the brakes for when the human interaction delay is too long. And humans make mistakes, too, so its not like you have eliminated that problem.

Yes, but computers crash. Systems fail. Files get corrupted. File systems get corrupted. This isn't (always) due to human error. The numerous failed orbiters sent to Mars could have averted destruction/failure had they human pilots or commanders on-site - a conversion error isn't a problem when you're flying by feel.

And the difference between humans making errors and computers making errors is that humans have the potential (and often realize it) to know that they have made a mistake. Computers do not.

Human spaceflight is more about the spirit of adventure than science. Space science is important, but it is a secondary goal. The spirit of adventure speaks loudly to the public and to decision makers. It is that spirit that fuels NASA's budget. Space science rides on the coattails of human spaceflight.

Precisely.

Swansont - what do you mean for the progression of technology being used as a "pro?" That technology for getting to Mars will improve? That has founding. While a moon mission - manned or unmanned - would not make great strides in the field of AI (unless it was created to do so, which is inevitably a waste of money), a moon mission WOULD make great strides in the technology and expertise available for - as well as the feasibility of - a Mars mission. While AI and a mission to the moon aren't necessarily connected, a moon mission and a Mars mission are.

And as far as the (7?) second signal delay to the moon goes - I am well aware that automation has reached the point of coping with this, but take it as a metaphor. Imagine a seven-second delay between pressing the brake on your car and the brake being applied. It would make for a rather bad crash. If something went seriously wrong, even with total automation (meaning no human loss), there would still be a MASSIVE economic loss - maybe even the whole "colony." Need I mention that mining works with a number of dangerous chemicals - especially high explosives?

I understand that we are talking about many billions, if not trillions, of dollars, but why do you need a reason? What's wrong with exploring for exploration's sake?

JohnB's analysis of it vibes perfectly with me. It's pure opinion, and meant to be nothing more. I imagine the same person would say "absolutely not" to a manned Mars mission.

Swansont, first, there's a tendency to distrust robots, but a number of functions would require intelligence (especially if it were to be used as a construction facility for interplanetary spacecraft or a spaceport or any of the above) which is beyond the current state of AI. And remote controlling is out - even on the moon, the signal delay is too long.

Just my $0.02.

Wow, what an honour.

I realize that this is quite possibly a joke, and I don't want to sound snappy or immature.

However...

While you are familiar with the Commonwealth spelling of honour, as well as others (centre, industrialisation, and so on and so forth), Pangloss is a resident of the US - Florida, to be somewhat exact (at least according to his profile, which I have no reason to ignore). The US English spelling of honor is in fact honor.

Remember - this is a global forum. Think of things from a global perspective.

But yes, people who can't spell are extremely annoying.

The only silly teaching method that's been a problem was the move away from European Classical Education, which placed a high value on debate and logic rather than memorization and trivia.

Amen. I wish that schools placed as much emphasis on critical thought and logic as I did. That's why I often do well on things like vocabulary tests - I remember concepts and processes and systems and components, not specific items. I might not know a specific word, but if I know its components (stems/roots), than I can make a good guess at its meaning.

Critical thinking - it's simply vital for society to function and advance. The stupidity of the general public never ceases to amaze me.

Ok, speaking as a parent of public schools and former recent student of higher education I can say that John B has a good handle on what's happened in our schools. Mokele is coming from a university perspective and will be equally disgusted when he gets kids of his own and realizes what public elementary school as fizzled down to.

I don't think Mokele was arguing about the middle schools. I think Mokele was specifically refuting JohnB's attack on uni-level education. And as far as pre-secondary education goes... The emphasis on tests is not necessarily due to the teachers. Part of the problem is that the general public accepts test scores as a good indication of quality of education - something test scores do not indicate well. Part of this (as well as a bunch of the testing) is due to the No Child Left Behind act - we see it in HS as well.

And as far as homework is concerned, Jr. High School (at least the more "advanced," or high school-level) sure chugs out homework. The emphasis in homework before that (at least in my experience) was always on projects.

I must ask, because I am curious: ParanoiA, is your experience with your child(ren)'s schools based on city education, suburban education, or rural education? My guess would be city.

If you look at the nobel prizes and such for the past hundred years its quite clear that americans have dominated the sciences and just about everything else for the past 70 years, considering that that coincides wit hthe generation entering school in 1890 or there abouts, obviously the move away from european education was somewhat of a good thing.

Who is to say that the receivers of Nobel Prizes valued the educational system? Perhaps these individuals did think critically and valued something beyond rote memorization. Perhaps that's a large part of the reason that they were so extraordinary.

I would say that a certain amount of memorizaion and such has to be undertaken before students are able to think critically. furthermore i'd say that students must reach a certain age (probably around 15) before they can think critically.

I strongly disagree. I simply hate to use myself as an example for things like this, but I haven't used rote memorization since it was forced upon me for multiplication tables. I don't even memorize things for German. I learn concepts, I intuit things, and if they are important, they will implant in my brain. While individuals might have to reach a certain mental age, a physical age for critical thought cannot be assigned, short of perhaps 6-10 (which is Erikson's middle childhood stage). I would place it at the concrete operational stage in the theory of cognitive development (wikipedia briefly defines concrete as: "occurs between the ages of 6 and 11 years and is characterized by the appropriate use of logic.").

The problem today is that on average students don't see a purpose in their education other than to get a good job, and for most of the smart ones thats not much of a motivator.

I agree that students don't see a purpose in education. Like Cap'n said, the students just don't care. The ones who do care are the same ones who use their free time to do things like this - those who enjoy knowledge, value critical thinking, and employ logic regularly. These are the students we should really worry about, and these are the ones that are constantly ignored. NCLB, education reforms, what have you - they always try to teach to the low end of the spectrum, they try to raise the floor. If you raise the floor and ignore the ceiling, you will escape the floodwaters - but you won't have done much good because you won't be able to stand in a 2-foot tall room. That's why I like this panel's suggestions - they allow students at the top end of the spectrum - the ones with the drive and the motivation and the will to seek knowledge for knowledge's sake - a way to pursue their interests before they grow uninterested and repulsed.

Those are quite cool...

I'll see how far I am in a few days haha. I just finished 1-6 in the past 35:43. They're easy as soon as you get the hang of it. Those stupid wires hung me up (I tried to do it with the drawn lines crossed; didn't work), but I got it after a few minutes.

It would be a huge help to display the correlation in a matrix - I forgot how to do this, but it is possible.

I didn't quite get what's going on - although that might just be 1.) me and 2.) lack of sleep.

well I think that some change is neessary, but not neccessarily a test based change. Testing leads schools to teach towards the test, and ignore everything else, if everybody has to solve quadratics and cubic equations then why would you spend any money on teaching shop or photography? as these things would surely not be on the test.

 

 

also you say that the plan would essentially call for students of a higher calibur to stay in school two years longer relearning things they already know, why wouldn't these students move on while everyone else stayed in or something like that.

Ahah. But the commission recommended something that would solve both of these issues in one step. As far as teaching towards the test goes, I cannot offer anything. However, the plan did deal with teaching other subjects. That, in fact, was what the extra two years were for. The students would NOT relearn information they already know. Only those who fail the exam would need to take courses that would reteach material - these courses being entirely remedial.

Those who passed would be able, as per their choice, to either take more classes at school - classes of their choice, for vocational or technical or scholastic reasons or what have you - or to move on, at that point, to post-secondary school. I would probably have jumped at the chance to leave for college at the end of year 10 - not because I want to go get stoned or anything, but rather because I am so frustrated with the terrible state of secondary education in the US.

We're on the same side. Read the article, it explains it in far better detail. Also, the main disadvantage of the German Abitur is how incredibly stressful it is on the students, which would not be true of this tupe of exam.

Note: this is not an excerpt (except for quoted text). See below for full original article.

I, for one, would endorse (and vote for) any legislation passed that implemented such a system. I think that it would supply a much-needed reform to a system that I have grown to hate, and will soon be leaving (thank God, I'm halfway done with year 12 as of Friday the 22nd).

[source:Chicago Tribune, page 1 of section 1 ("Panel: Revamp U.S. high schools"; article also available online at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0612150315dec15,1,6644357.story?ctrack=1&cset=true)]

Ecoli, I hear you guys are having terrible skiing weather...

Yeah. I shoveled the front stoop, and by the time I'd shoveled the concrete walkway to the driveway, the stoop had another half-inch (centimetre) of snow on it.

So I pretty much gave up. Haha.

It has cleared up considerably now - just the odd snowflake or two. The wind has died down to the occasional gust. I'm looking right at a 2 foot (about 2/3 meter) drift through my window. Genecks - you aren't at UIUC, are you?

Yeah, I might be lucky, but those poor ba$tards in the 16-car pileups (dead serious) on the highways sure aren't.

It seems to have cleared up. We have drifts as tall as two or so feet. It's pretty awesome - except the roads, which are terrible.

Yeehaw, we've been granted a snow day here in the midwest. Actually, we currently are under "blizzard conditions" - 20-30 mph winds (sorry, can't concentrate enough to change that to klicks/hour right now, but I'd guess around 60km/h) and still heavy snow.

And lemme tell you, it's gorgeous!

I suppose there's really no way to know (other than colorblindness). If colors look differently to them, then they've been taught what to call them regardless.

But if you mean something like colorblindness, I have no idea.

What exactly do you mean by horizontally flipping your reflection? Horizontal with respect to the mirror surface (left-to-right)? Or horizontal from your persepctive (front-to-back)? Judging by the posts, you meant left-to-right, but I thought I'd ask. Why? Just curious.

Like I said before, I'm all for self-teaching - in fact, I prefer it - but her job is to prepare us for the tests, which she is decidedly not doing. We do (almost literally) nothing in class. The "lectures" are all jokes, and a typical day has us either talking about something that has absolutely nothing to do with government all day, or arguing over gay rights or abortion or something like that in a "structured" debate.

The teacher is also extremely condescending, and very, very favoritist. There are things I get away with in that class that I really shouldn't (late assignments, late to class, etc etc) simply because of the fact that I'm me (being a NMS semifinalist probably has something to do with it. Come February I'll find out more in that regard...). The majority of the class hates it, mainly because we do absolutely nothing. It's pretty ridiculous.

The idea is to self-teach - but to help learn the material by teaching others along the way. That's the core of the idea, at least.

Cheers.

Over the past... however many weeks it has been since school started, I have grown increasingly frustrated by my government class. It is an AP course (AP U.S. and Comparative Government, for those of you residing outside of the States) and should be university-level education. However, the class reminds me more of grade school than uni.

We constantly do nothing in the class. We continually do projects that teach us nothing and allow us to fake doing work. In the past... two months I don't believe I have learned a single thing in that class. In fact, the teacher has made progress in dumbing us down - she encourages 5-paragraph essay format, which is heralded by our English department (and rightly so) as a trite and juvenile format. It works well for things like book reviews, which really should not be done past the middle-school level. The entire class, with one or two exceptions, agrees that we are perpetually doing nothing.

And the worst thing? The attitude of the teacher. She flat out told us that "there isn't any way she'd be able to prepare us for the AP test" and essentially that she isn't even going to try to actually educate us.

AHEM!! I'M ALL FOR SELF-TEACHING, BUT PREPARING US FOR THE AP TEST IS YOUR JOB!!

***

So, past the moaning and groaning. I am very seriously considering dropping the course at semester (at least 1 sem of government is required to graduate) and teaching myself the remainder of the course, and still taking the AP test.

But while I was considering this, an idea hit me that I would like to try and pass by the social studies department as well as the administration.

Why not a student-conducted class? The best way to learn something is to teach it, is it not? So what about a small (5-7 people would probably be ideal) class with NO teacher and only students, responsible, diligent students, teaching themselves the material? They would still follow a curriculum, and would still be evaluated (by tests, probably the ones the teacher is already giving). However, instead of the typical hierarchical format, the students would be self-motivated. The "class" would meet two or three times a week, and in the middle each student would do research/work/etc. When the group would convene, they wouldn't just share what they'd found. Each person would have a specific task during the off-days. For example, if the "class" were researching political parties, one person might have to explain the platform of the Constitution Party (bleh!!!), and another the platform of the Green Party, etc etc. When the group met, each student would teach the rest the information. The rest of the group would note-ify the information, or commit it to memory however each student saw fit.

The other possibility that comes to mind is that of student-proposed projects. Keeping with the political party example, someone might come across some information on the World Socialist Party of the United States. That student could propose to the group that they do a sidebar on it. One person might focus on its history, another two or three on its platform, etc. This particular example does not meld very well, mostly because it is a tangent from the subject of US Government, but that is aside the point.

So before I open this up to comments and suggestions, I must apologize if that is incoherent. It has been a long, cold, long day and I'm not thinking totally straight. Thanks much.

Bob, I might be delving into something I don't know that much about here, but I don't think air was the oxidizer...

I am beginning to think it might be a CD-ROM problem (in addition to an OS problem).

But as far as windows not booting - that's either an OS problem, a hard drive problem, or a file system problem, judging on the evidence...

Gaming, for one. Two, compatibility with school stuff. Three, Sibelius. Four, software. ITunes for me as well.

Plus I just don't have the time to fiddle around with switching totally to Linux.

5614 - The first thing I did was put the CD-ROM as the first boot device. This went straight to GRUB every time, which annoyed me. So I disabled all but the CD-ROM. No go, threw the "No Bootable Devices" error. I am not sure whether or not my computer sees the CD-ROM (I'm working on checking that now; it's complicated) but I seem to remember trying to boot from a disk previously and being unable to do so (and my CD-ROM drive was definitely working then.

But yes, it seems to be very unusual.

Yes, it can.