Pretty soon they'll drop HTML support
One word. "Apps."
Pretty soon they'll drop HTML support
One word. "Apps."
(Hilarious and ironic? Is that a challenge?)
What's hilarious and ironic is that you here are doing the Exact Same Thing.
Whoa there, buddy. I'm an innocent witness! I told you something fascinating (IMHO) that I saw happen in 1985 and now you're giving me shit for it?
Fine. Next time someone tells you they're concerned that "hackers" may have influenced their computer, I'll just let you go on thinking that they're bragging about how awesome their computer is. Then we'll see who looks like the insensitive clod.
Later you'll find out, briefly wonder why Sloppy didn't tell you about the new meaning of "hacker," and then you'll remember this day. You'll come crawling back, on your hands and knees, offering to do to all sorts of gay things to earn my forgiveness.
Genie's out of the bottle. You can whine and bitch it all you want about how stupid it might be, but "gay" has at least three meanings now, and some hipster (THERE! Now you can accuse me of labeling people) will come along and explain "gay" is up to five meanings now. And maybe then I'll join your side, saying, "Enough. I don't want to know."
This research shows one more reason that licking both your wounds and your young is a good idea.
I think you just found a new defense that Jerry Sandusky's lawyers can use...
One of the nice things about MITX is that the homework and tests are the same they take at the actual school. No watering down. Of course the negative is that you don't have all the resources you would on campus (fellow students, office hours, etc), making it harder.
This isn't evil; it's stupid. It's not even embrace/extend/extinguish. It's embrace/back_off/get_forgotten. Google is kidding themselves if they think anyone cares about
I saw it happen, plus the resulting confusion. What's really shocking is how long ago it was. It was around 1985. English teacher gave hard assignment. Student said "that's so gay!" meant as a generic pejorative. Teacher thought he was being called a homosexual and student was in deep shit.
It happened, over a quarter century ago. I can cut the 1985 teacher some slack for not knowing. I can cut a 2013 teacher some slack for disciplining a student for bitching about homework. But I can't cut anyone slack in 2013 for not knowing "gay" is a generic pejorative. If you don't know gay is a generic pejorative by now, then you also probably missed the memo that it means homosexual. You probably think it means "happy."
Words. They're like tech skills. Keep up or be left behind.
Actually what the article notes is pretty much my own observation too, having lived around "poor" neighborhoods -- they lived better than I did, drove newer vehicles, ate more junk food, owned more shit, etc.
Well let's take a process like "quenching steel" compared to regular steel, you still have all the same basic ingredients, you heat it up and cool it down but really the rapid quenching brings out new and novel properties in the steel. It surely should qualify for a patent, it's not like the regular steel smith has a patent for everything his smithy could do - yet the smith has never done or even thought about doing. In the same way it would be absurd to patent the Turing complete machine and say all software is merely the application of machine states. On the other end of the spectrum if you add 0.01% table salt and claim your quenched steel+salt isn't infringing on any patent because it only says steel, the courts will laugh at your attempt to trivially avoid the patent. Most software is like that, trivial changes of inputs, instructions, ordering etc. are "new" but not in any sense novel while software with new functionality that's never been done before sounds novel and non-obvious to me.
Is there a value to sending people to school beyond testable knowledge? That's a big question.
No, because the obvious answer is yes. But do you have to lump it together with tests to measure specific knowledge? I've had years of regular full time onsite university education, if what I need is to prove my ability in a specific topic then that should be possible without requiring a meager and largely irrelevant addition to my general interpersonal skills, particularly if my available hours, location or other duties make it impractical or impossible. At least anything that can be reasonably accomplished through exams and exercises, I don't really see how we could let loose doctors and lawyers without real world experience with real patients and clients which necessitates a controlled training program. Most fields are not like that though, if it's all on paper or computer or with inanimate objects then you should be able to read yourself to a degree in most STEM fields.
"The Empire never ended."
-- Horselover Fat
Now anyone and everyone can get access to training and education, to better themselves in their spare time.
Just like anyone could previously by reading a gorram book at the public library.
Calling a set of taped lectures a "massive open on-line course" is just another silly bit of overhyping "X, but on the Interwebz!" Yes, it is nice that the net makes more content available more efficiently, but this is an evolutionary step, not any sort of revolution.
Or, maybe vaccines aren't effective period.
Yep. It's also possible that bullets are unrelated to shooting deaths. It could just be a statistical fluke that people shot with loaded guns are more likely to die than people shot with unloaded guns.
Company Spokesman: Surely you don't think it's our fault.
Company Spokesman: Especially if it's going to cost us money.
A pound of hamburger, some macaroni, tomato sauce...
It may not be fine dining, but it can be done.
"It's in process": So wrapped up in red tape that the situation is almost hopeless.