Sounds cool as long as it's not a HOA that runs with deed. The community pool where I grew up was like that and it worked fine. If you were in the community you had the right but not the obligation to purchase a membership.
Here's another way of looking at it:
If longer lives were optimal for our species, we would already be living them.
Every species has an average lifespan. Parrots, tortoises, and whales are highly successful and live long lives. OTOH, flies and rats are also highly successful and live short lives.
The species as a whole is "tuned" to live a certain period of time. This is a significant evolutionary parameter. The era of highly developed societies with extended lives due to advanced medicine is just a blink in time. We don't even know if our current level is sustainable or compatible with survival of our species as a whole. Yes, this individual would love to live a healthy 150 year life. You do have to consider what it will do to the replacement rate. Whales are taking a long time to come back. Long life seems to correlate with lower replacement rate. A population full of old folks might be more prone to extinction.
However, there is a problem with this solution to the very complex existing in less than infinite time: the monkey should be handing us a large number of copies of the the works of Shakespeare, not just one
That presupposes something about how many copies the monkeys are apt to produce. I could sign on to them handing us zero or infinity copies under an infinite time scenario, whereas any "large number" would be arbitrary. The "infinite copies" outcome is not a problem because the mean time between deliveries is sufficient for us to burn them.
I made what might be an erroneous assumption that you were familiar with the New Math which was taught in the USA.
The wiki article says it was a 60s phenomenon, but based on my experience at least some of these concepts lived on in mutated form well into the 70s. There were a lot of educational experiments tried in the 60s and 70s. Perhaps even worse than "new math" was "open classrooms" which is like "open offices" for kids.
So, the idea of "teaching calculus to 5 year olds" is not new to me. It's "new math" all over again. Hopefully they don't throw out the A-B-Cs this time in the rush to teach great literature.
I don't know about "brainwashing," but I sure think that rote memorization is inappropriate 99% of the time and that it ruins educations.
At least you're not saying "never". I think 99% is a bit harsh. The link was long; but I skimmed it. The music analogy is interesting. You obviously wouldn't want a musician to be all reading/writing scores. OTOH, a music teacher that ignored notation and sight-reading would be doing a grave disservice to students.
My childhood gives me a comparative case study: grades K-3 with public school and some "new math". Grades 4-6 in private school with traditional everything. Grades 7-12 in public school then a BSEE.
The "new math" tried to teach us long division with a really klutzy version of division by successive subtraction. Working a problem such as 9354935793578 / 7656 was not realistic. We were making little check-boxes and guesses. Their method for long division was absolutely horrible for large numbers, and working ONE long division problem took half an hour.
I the traditional private school I learned long division using the classic decimal place subtraction method where you gradually accumulate your result at the top of the paper and get a long train of carefully prescribed subtractions trailing down the page. Much, much better. Homework might involve 5 long division problems that could be worked in 15 minutes if you were good.
Then in high school when I got into computing I understood what "new math" was trying to do. They were trying to show us how to figure things out ourselves, how division relates to subtraction. In grade school though, it was just frustrating.
I don't think we should throw out "new math" entirely either; but we shouldn't use it to the exclusion of tried and true algorithms. Some of the bright students are going to ask questions like, "why does this work". New math is good for those students; but the "repetitive and boring" aspect of rote learning is too easily replaced by "frustrating, useless and slow" in new math curricula.
OK, I wasn't going after "data science" specifically, but ad algos and how my twitter feed has become a cesspool of mental masturbation for ad algorithm people, which is the "killer app" for "big data":
1. PhD invents fantastic ad algo. 2. Guy sees ad on iPhone, takes EBT card there. 1. PhD applies for EBT card. #OneTwoPunch
Wow, I can't believe I just typed that many buzzwords in a Slashdot post; but at least I had a reason and put most of them in quotes... dammit. "algos". Anyway, I wonder if everybody's twitter feed is as bad as mine lately. I think it might have to do with a former co-worker who now works in that field. Thus, I get a lot of improperly targeted ads for people who are in the data-mining/ad biz. Of course I'll never buy their product--I'm not a CxO who's looking to proactively synergize my paradigms.... but it's an interesting "fly on the wall" view of how that world works, so I'm not entirely sure if I should find a way to stop it.
"you spend 60 hours a day"
It isn't too often I genuinely laugh at my own expense. Thanks for pointing that out. Free editorial essays on the intertubs. You get what you pay for.
Focusing on diet for human lifespan is like focusing on gasoline for car lifespan.
Studies have been done of places where people tend to live longer. Some common threads are: genetics, happiness, close community ties, everyday physical labor, low stress, diet and maybe a few other things.
Yeah sure, diet is in there; but if your Daddy died at 40, you're pissed off all the time, you don't know your neighbors and you spend 60 hours a day stressing in a cube-farm then the quinoa salad you ate probably won't help much. Go ahead though. It probably won't hurt; just don't expect miracles. Look at *all* the factors.
Even if they don't get it the first time, continued exposure is good. I can think of a lot of things in math that didn't "click" until I'd heard it the umpteenth time. For example, how to count to umpteen.
I think a little bit of "modern" math is good but the old stuff still needs to be taught. Rote memorization gets a bad rap; but IMHO the 10X10 multiplication table should be committed to memory just like the alphabet. All else equal, a student with the table in his head will be able to work more quickly and confidently than one without. Notice I said 10X10 table. An odd thing is that they taught us 12X12. I think it's a tradition held over from the English system, where you had 12 inches in a foot. 12*12 even has the name "gross". There's nothing wrong with teaching the traditional table; but it would be nice if they put a red line or something around the 10X10 portion of it so that students understood the significance of that--that 10X10 is the key to unlocking virtually unlimited multiplication abilities with pen, paper, and the simple algorithm that "old math" taught us.
Nothing particular that I remember. Nothing particularly ingenious--just your standard sexual or scatalogical humor. Sometimes they'd draw a penis on the card or something.
When you win the prize, be sure to go downtown and flash the cash in front of everybody. When you get beat up and robbed, use your leftover money to post a prize for "flashing your cash around town without getting beat up and robbed". If anybody says you shouldn't do that, casually dismiss them. They are not part of "the club".
Fond memories of bucket-sorting (I always called it bin sorting) on temp jobs in the early 90s. The early 90s had a lot of paper-to-digital temp jobs like that. It was an OK way to pick up cash when "real jobs" were hard to find. Entering insurance claims from paper forms was probably the most interesting. The last time I did anything like this was business reply cards in 2004. That one came off Craigslist. Gigs like that have to be getting few and far between since everybody has a device now. BTW, if you put a joke address on a business-reply card it actually brightens the otherwise boring day of the data entry clerk.
Are CS courses really available in all districts? It's easier to assume that now when everybody has 3 computers falling out of their pockets. It definitely wasn't true when I was in school. There may still be some districts where the courses aren't available or there aren't enough slots for all who want to take them. When I was in school the tech was a bottleneck. Today the bottleneck is probably a shortage of qualified teachers. So. I don't think it's available as an elective to everybody. Certainly just throwing a bunch of kids with iPads and a text book into a room with the PE teacher who was the only guy available... that's not teaching. Of course, that goes for a lot of things not just CS.
I can describe that insanity in 140 characters or less.
if you think for a second that we haven't manipulated plants and animals for thousands of years, you're being naive.
GMO != selective breeding. GMO == advanced techniques for inserting new DNA directly into genomes. For example, fish genes into plants. That kind of thing doesn't happen in selective breeding, and we have only been doing it for a few decades.