Where do Zuckerberg and Ellison fit into this Lucasian demonology?
One is from Naboo and the other from the forest moon of Endor. I'll let you decide which is which...
Hundred or so? Why not be nice and install a decent quality vending machine with subsidised (even free) coffee? Not only does it mitigate the fire risks no one ever gets the chance to complain that someone before them took the last cup and didn't make more...
And as for quality there are some really good machines out there that are better than some local coffee houses (assuming you fill it with a decent coffee)
These are the steps I use to sort stuff...
1. Extract hard drive from computer that needs sorting.
2. Insert it into working Linux system and copy all user files that need to be kept to a directory
3. Reinstall the hard drive back into the non booting computer
4. Reinstall windows on the broken computer (or use the factory reset if it has one)
5. Transfer the needed files via a samba share to the now sorted computer.
6. Snoop through my co-workers files and post the funny ones on the internet. (optional)
7. Collect reward, and bask in the glory of being called a miracle worker and saving all those (interchangeable) photos of co-worker children etc while giving (pointless) lecture on making backups.
There are variants of this that involve using live CDs and USB drives or only doing step 4 but these can cause unwanted complications that I prefer to avoid and often result in skipping some or all of step 7.
Currently playing Harvey's new eyes... tons more content and more sadistic humour than the slightly disappointing/obvious/short Broken Age (Act1)
Nice try but while it is possible to admin the server itself (and any MS services) via powerscript and no GUI sometimes the (often legacy or at the very least not metro) 3rd party software the server is there to host can't be configured/run without one.
Also add into the mix development servers and developers that are being paid to integrate and extend the 3rd party software and not spend half their time writing one time scripts (or waiting days for a sever admin to approve that script depending on the local policy) to correct a trivial problem that their code created during testing that could be easily resolved with half a dozen clicks in a GUI with a limited access account.
I have found yelp to be extremely accurate. I have never gone to anyplace with high marks on yelp and regretted it.
I have never gone to anyplace because of high marks on yelp and never regretted it.
You all do realise that this is probably just a Reality TV hoax right? along the same lines as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Cadets_(TV_series)
Likely they will 'train' the winners then put them in a 'ship' with no windows and which happens to have gravity due to the 'acceleration' needed and film them with 100 hidden cameras...
They may even 'land' them in an isolated desert somewhere for a while...
All the BEST conspiracies are factual... especially the ones that seem so unlikely no sane person could believe them to be true...
Anyway... Putting all the privacy/Evil Overlords/Brainwashing arguments aside it hasn't been signed by anyone under duress. It is really just a starting point for negotiations between the "entity" and code.org. In the corporate world you never sign anything without legal looking at it. If it is for something important (like this is) you always negotiate better terms especially when the other party needs you more than you need them (code.org needs the schools more than the schools need code.org).
The first contract isn't much more than a wish list by the one drafting it. Sometimes they only include unreasonable terms just so they have something to give up in discussions instead of something less extreme that they need more. If schools/districts/whoever sign up to this unmodified they need a change of management.
But if things were different what would the best moan about on
Teaching styles and results vary however due to the way data is gathered, averaged and analysed it is always possible to prove one is better than the other. If I could be be bothered (which I can't) I'm sure I could dig out several peer reviewed studies that show the bigger the class and the more standardised the material the better the education level of the population... The small class, focused teaching case falls apart compared to the fixed lesson plans scenario any time the teacher for whatever reason doesn't want to be teaching at that particular point in his/her life (this can be for many reasons ranging from illness, death of a relative all the way to plain overwork or being just an incompetent teacher).
You can determine this from anonymous aggregated data
There isare two things that I would change... 2) the extended performance data needs to be anonymous.
You're mostly agreeing with me here... The larger data set should be anonymous but there are several good reasons that at least some of the data isn't.
And there is why so many educational programmes only ever give average results. They measure averaged data against averaged data and surprisingly normally come out around average. The result is an average level of education.
Understanding if the programme benefits students with higher or lower abilities is important not only statistically important but also for any educational programme to make sense. There is no point to the programme if while the overall class did better than average it was down to one or two super bright students doing really well while most of the class actually fell behind - especially when a program is intended to help students that may be struggling or to promote knowledge across a wide range of abilities.
I started on a ZX81 then moved to a ZX Spectrum, and then to a +3. did some basic programming, played some games and was content with what I had. I was in effect vendor locked into Sinclair as it was the only system I had access to or knew how to use.
Then I got access to BBC Masters at school and I was even more content learning to program in Comal. It was the only system I had any programming teaching in until my Uni days.
Then I moved to an Amiga 500, Rexx, Amos, and others. All learned on the totally different environment of my Sinclair and BBC days and all was good for a while.
Shortly after my first PC (an old second-hand 386) which came with MS dos and windows 3.1. For about a year I used nothing but Dos, Windows, Turbo C and this matched what I had access to at Uni (not counting the VAX cluster).
I heard about this thing called Linux and I promptly repartitioned my flatmates 486DX and spent the next week downloading slackware one disk bundle at a time (I only owned 10 floppies.. I was a student and they were expensive!)
Today I switch between Windows, Linux, Android, Mac and others and program to varying extents in most, using several different languages as needed (cursing some, loving others).
Anyway my point is just because you start somewhere doesn't mean that's where you stay. If those backing code.org thing that the brightest students will stick to the products they were trained in they are deluded. Only the average and below students will never expand their knowledge beyond their training and I'm fine with that.
The good and best will still end up doing what they like, make their own choices, making a difference where they can and will have the intelligence to use the best tools for the job rather than the one their peers pressure them into using for whatever reason.