Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Hand out the PP slides after the talk. (Score 1) 181

by spamking (#46430343) Attached to: Physics Forum At Fermilab Bans Powerpoint

Yes. But why hand out slides? Why have slides at all? You've already learned more than the slides contain; what will slides add?

If you like notes, you were taking notes during the talk - which are more useful than slides would be.

I think most folks get more out of an interactive lecture than some death by powerpoint . . . However, providing the "slides" or whatever later can allow students/participants to compare their notes with the lecture content. I have been known to miss a few points throughout a lecture and not get them written down.

Comment: Re:critical thinking (Score 1) 561

by spamking (#40701951) Attached to: Obama Wants $1 Billion For "Master Teachers Corps"

I blame the unions. The unions get their money from the teachers.

That's a fair statement. But I'm sure some teachers couldn't tell you anything about their union or their talking points.

If the teachers put a stop to it it would halt. They do not. They say they give a shit about the kids. But that is not as important as a years pay for a few months work, full benefits for them for life and tenure.

A few month's work? That's the second time you've mentioned that. What's the deal?

You do realize that there are many teachers on 12-month contracts and that those teachers work year-round right?

Comment: Re:Protip: (Score 1) 646

That does not necessarily involve being overly paranoid and outright spying on all of their communications.

Are you saying a parent has no right to "spy" on anything their kids are doing? That's very naive . . .

Now you've excluded anyone who doesn't do so as a "good parent." No True Good Parent would tell you otherwise.

Unfortunately there are also bad parents in this world to go along with the good ones . . .

What metric are you using to determine what a true good parent is? One that sees things the way you do? Which is obviously to allow the kid to do what they want and hope they make the right choice on their own?

Because many people seem to be, in my opinion, going overboard. They're paranoid of everything and desperate to block anything they don't want their precious children seeing based on what appears to be nothing. For the children, of course.

If going overboard = me poking my nose into my daughters' lives then I'll gladly go overboard. If being paranoid = me attempting to keep them innocent and sheltered from what I deem to be inappropriate material for their age then I'll gladly be paranoid. Kids grow up fast enough today. No need to make it happen any faster.

Since I find it highly unlikely that they'll actually be affected in a negative way by the content, any age. Unless the parent has determined themselves that this specific child is negatively affected by the content. It seems to be assumed most of the time.

What if I find it very likely that my child is affected in a negative way by this content? Based on what you've been posting most parents aren't smart enough to make that determination . . .

Comment: Re:Communication (Score 1) 646

You claimed an 8-year-old can self-regulate their XBox usage.

And they very well might be able to. But it's possible to be responsible in general without being responsible 100% of the time.

And that's the point . . . I would hope a parent would be able to better determine if their 8 year-old was behaving responsibly and know better than the 8 year-old would.

Comment: Re:Protip: (Score 1) 646

now that i'm older, employed, and independent, i respect parents who spy even less...it often means they haven't been able to effectively influence their kids (i.e., dont trust their own parenting) and are overcompensating to remedy that reality by spying.

So setting a limit or filter on something your child might have access to makes you a bad parent?

I'm beginning to wonder if any of you saying crap like this have ever been around kids . . .

It doesn't have anything to do with not being able to influence them at all . . . . we were kids once too. We know how things go. Boundaries are explained to kids, but they'll sometimes still bump up against them or completely step over them. If a parent can implement something to prevent them being stepped over and doesn't do it I think many will eventually wish that they would have.

Comment: Re:Protip: (Score 1) 646

How is it not spying?

Hate to break it to you but a parents job involves knowing what their kids are up to. Any good parent will tell you that. If you think however a parent accomplishes this is spying then I guess it sucks for you . . . don't do something you'd be ashamed your parents of finding out about.

I'll "spy" on my kids until their of age to take care of themselves . . . .

Not if your parents aren't imbeciles. As I said, if the child is at least somewhat intelligent, say goodbye to any respect they had for you thanks to your meaningless paranoia.

Please explain how anything that was posted implies a parent is an imbecile for being concerned about, and filtering what their kids can and cannot see online, on the TV or in any situation you can think of? Meaningless paranoia? Really? At what age should a child be able to decide for themselves what they are capable of handling?

Real Programmers don't write in PL/I. PL/I is for programmers who can't decide whether to write in COBOL or FORTRAN.

Working...