Heh, so Java itself is multi-platform, because each version of it is its own platform! ;)

Not around here. But I had to abandon 10 years of C++ for that very reason. Unfortunately. (Luckily MS has grown C# with a lot of what are to me C++ influences, unlike Java which was among other things meant to be an anti-C++.)

Unless someone is going on to become higher educated for engineering or something like that, its level is pointless for the daily life of the modern American citizen. I had to take a year of the stuff for my BSCS and in 18 years as a professional programmer I've needed to use any of it exactly zero times.

K-12 should focus on skills for life. In high screwl I had geometry, then algebra 2, then trig (and something called math analysis). I'd say even as a programmer most of what I use is probably algebra 1. Most of what was taught had no utility to most kids. Topics with any application to normal life should be plucked from all three and combined into a series of applied math courses.

For example teach kids about things like interest and amortization and compounding. Lots of real-world examples on those instead of esoteria. For Joe Sixpack, crap like learning the quadratic formula is useless, but how to save for the future and not get into credit card debt is... priceless.

...Pelosi meant that he doesn't get it, I think she meant that he doesn't get that it's over. That the sun has set on American republicanism, and it only serves as an irritant, as that of a buzzing fly, to prattle on as if there were any going back.

Completely disagree with Bill there. Literature is completely lost on children, and is a big waste of their time. Like things like economics, it should be higher education only, and just prepare the yutes with the three R's so they can function in society. And I would say teach critical thinking, so they can protect themselves from being ripped off (in the various ways; i.e. not just financially).

What's sad is that college is wasted on the youth. Like I suspect the vast majority of college grads in the last few generations at least, it was to just get through it. People complain that college is now viewed as vocational training but I don't think it's even that. I think it's predominantly viewed as just to get that piece of paper, that so many jobs (often unnecessarily) require.

But now that I'm more grown-up (okay, only slightly, since college), I could totally see myself in retirement (voluntary or involuntary, however it turns out), when I actually have the time to pursue such things, taking the time to read the great works of literature et al. That is, the time to truly consider all that flowery language and ponder it. But while we have busy lives, most of us just won't feel like we have the time for giving ourself a truly higher education.

s/hoards/hordes/

Doh.

Those should look like:

[...]
by jelIomizer (3670957) Alter Relationship on Sunday August 10, 2014 @04:12PM (#47644097) 12

by jeIlomizer (3670951) Alter Relationship on Sunday August 10, 2014 @04:16PM (#47644113)
[...]

And one more thing: Both accounts have several freaks, but those could all be recent. But the #57 account has 3 fans. I'm guessing from whatever was the ultra-PC post that earned the +5 achievement. So I'd guess the spammer didn't post a lot between the pursuit of that one bit of cred and the ultimate dirty deed. Maybe all it takes is to get one +5 post and then a new account moves into a status where it can post like mad?

> Progress is the fruit

I hadn't taken it that far in my head at the time, but now that you have for me, yes. Progressivism is the promise of a perfect society, created by man. It includes the evolution of man, by man, into perfect beings. It's secular humanism taken to the extent of a religion.

I believe that things can be improved, but only to make them less sucky/to a certain extent. Progressivism is belief that we (i.e. man) can always make things better, that we should and can progress towards a man-made utopia. That it's not futility after some point due to our fallen nature.

Adam and Eve had the good life, but fell for the lie that God is wrong and that it could be even better for them. That through their actions, they could surpass the level goodness of what our loving God sets up for us.

Man should know his limitations, and remain humble (without being fatalistic about our time in this condition). Progressivism preaches no limits (within the physical world).

Don't continue to stay hung up on the power thing because that's what you see emphasized on the Left, currently, in America. Sure, Lefties believe there needs to be a small ruling contingent, with absolute power, to keep the system in an equilibrium of "fairness". But they're only bent on acquiring as much power as possible, any way they can, for now, in this country, because they see the inequities as so great and that there's so far to go/so much to overcome to get this evil nation to a state of "fairness". I.e. tactics and philosophy are different things, and pursuits can have phases.

Good, because I firmly believe that's what we're supposed to learn. We got ourselves kicked out of the Garden because we thought we knew better than God, so God said fine, try it your way for a while. So He left us temporarily wandering through the desert (i.e. what post-Fall human existence is), to give us time to think about what we've done, and to come to the realization that, ultimately, we need God and can't manage on our own successfully.

So I would say don't despair too much about the temporal, as really it's supposed to be this way, because it's our doing. And would you expect it to be any other way, knowing mankind (and its spiritual temptor)?

So we should do what we can here (e.g. the American experiment was an awesome try, as a lesser evil form of human organization), but ultimately we have to wait until He leads us out of the desert and brings us home. Then we shall have our perfect society, because it will be ruled by an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent dictator. And like the founding of the U.S., the idea of using technology to take man out of the equation in certain things is an entirely worthy pursuit, because it can help, but it will never take us all the way there.

p.s. I liked your "Common parlance leads to common thinking, and is not fit for uncommon human beings."

I don't think Leftists would have a problem with everyone in the world being rich (assuming technology that protected their false idol, the Creation), *AS LONG AS* they were all about equally rich. (And exhibited due deference to a strong, centralized governmental authority.)

Liberty is evil not because it allows people to fail, but that it allows some to succeed while others fail. It allows inequity in "the system". Better that everyone succeeds or fails together. (Which is why "the equal distribution of misery", the necessary end result of Leftism, is nonetheless also considered a valid, moral outcome.)

> You won't really be seeing a doctor (or nurse) on the screen. Just an avatar and a script.

Dr. Watson I presume?

If smart watches take off, these could be your kits. Last I heard the rumor mills have Apple coming out with one next month, with "more than 10 sensors" (not all of them necessarily being biometric ones, granted), and MS with one with 11 sensors the following month. Especially with the fanatic following that Apple has (in devices), if they can make the smartwatch "cool", then smartphone makers who are seeing sales stagnate due to no more new compelling features can sell a few generations of smartwatches with progressively more and advanced sensors reading more of one's vitals.

Every phone call will start with:

And OTOH, the cost savings could be overcome by more demands on the healthcare system from people more willing to make a phone call on the spot than an appointment for a office visit for who knows how long into the future. What I usually do is wait and see if <mysterious symptom> goes away on its own in a few days. But in the back of my mind, I know I can't get in to see a doctor immediately (excluding going to urgent care, which from experience can soak up half your day, first with waiting around an hour or two to be seen, then time for test results to come back, while the doctore you're assigned is multitasking between a bunch of other visitors). So with the phone call option, I'd probably call every time. Even for the same price, and up to half an hour wait (put it on speakerphone), if I actually get to be heard by an MD.

(And this way, maybe many of the folks who got medical degrees and wanted to practice medicine, but could only get a job working for an insurance company evaluating diagnoses and claims, might be able to get into tele-practice at least.)