Well then there is a difference between the colloquial and the academic uses. That in itself is probably a big reason for the divide between positions on the issue.
Yep. It is an availability bias. We only hear about states rights when in completely screws something up. You can't seriously say that a uniform code of law works best across the country, can you? What is best for California is best for New York? Or what is best for Arkansaw is best for New Jersey? Or what is best for Hawaii is best for Montana? Different attitudes, different resources, different population densitities. We are strong because we are different but united, granted when we screw it up the we screw it up monumentally.
There is a good chance the test is flawed, but IQ is not the only indicator of high intelligence that points to a subset of people as intelligent but who don't perform well in school. It is pretty terrible when intelligent people can't do well in intelligence training.
My oldest is 6 and naturally curious about how it works. You could go through all the mechanics and he would be captivated with the description but never touch it. My youngest is 4 and you've got to be careful merely doing things in his presence.
I've done some work with human factors evaluation of HUDs for aircraft. Some information just needs to be text. It takes a bit longer to process but it is better to have critical text available near the field of view and refocus than to have to hunt for it at my knees and lose my reaction time. BTW, a well designed HUD isn't in focus at the optic. It looks like this one is focused a bit in front of the vehicle. A really nice one will be focused at pseudoinfinity and is mostly in focus anywhere you look.
Despite all the (partially true) snark. Isn't this a good thing? Shouldn't the highest court of the land be producing rulings that are predictably consistent with previous rulings? Unless a case is truly novel, past performance should be a good predictor of future performance here, since case law is cumulative.
"The real problem is the tendency of mankind to accept things as given without checking up on it." That isn't a problem that is one of the fundamental pieces to how our minds process a complex world.
Well I buy their argument that figuring out which teachers are truly bad teachers is exceptionally hard. Stakes are high, evaluation is tough, results play out over a long time, and there are really important corner cases for any evaluating. Parents should have a say but not too much. Peers should have a say but not too much. I guess it falls on administrators but that is our current scheme.
Not to undermine your point, but where is this: "job where people didn't habitually harass them"? I've supported several industries and I don't know that I could chart a course for my daughter to have a career "safe" from this.
Fair enough. I did notice you were avoiding that. Paying them like rockstars probably wouldn't but paying them enough to compete with other careers in their field might give us a few more good ones and a little more flexibility in tossing out the bad.
If a teacher is one or maybe two standard deviations then skill doesn't matter that much. However, a bad teacher can traumatize a kid against learning and a good teacher can inspire a kid to pursue education beyond what they would have. My wife and I are trying to undo the harm that my child's kindergarten teacher did to his perception of education. He does math above his grade level for fun but he isn't interested in stepping foot in school again. I probably wouldn't be starting my dissertation now without the influence of my high school Chemistry teacher way back then.
I know a lot of folks who are genuinely irritated with the day to day affairs of the federal government. They aren't out to limit anyone's rights and are quite convinced that your rights will be expanded, but the potential for abuse is pretty high given history. Even worse, a more local focused rule doesn't seem to historically offer as strong a protection against powerful corporate abuse. We will live with corporate abuse but we won't stand for abuse by the state.
That government ended in 1865 because allowing the more local governments broad authority resulted in many states creating a class of people who were subhuman.
Yeah, but it gives Comcast the wiggle room to say exactly what they said.
I used to think this way, but we are already doing that organically. If you look at the overall inflation numbers, it is getting easier and easier for people to afford things. Even conservatives are complaining that the poor have things that are too nice for their social standing. But the kicker is that the things we don't have a good grasp on automating are the very things that are core needs. We aren't seeing the same trend in food, energy, health care, and education.