Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Newsflash: Gov't prints money, prices increase (Score 1) 827

This is why some people make the single-payer argument for health care. No subsidies to give out so the private interests can just raise their prices. Also political suicide (in America, at least).

This is exactly why I make the argument that state run colleges should be state-run colleges, not institutions of private interest that the state throws funding at.

I think housing is completely different. Housing is out of control because people sell their shitty orange county house for $1.2 million then move to Austin and spend their $800k in equity on a house that should only cost about $200k. Yes, House Hunters and Property Brothers are often filmed in Austin and you can see this phenomenon several times a week. Yes, this is really a thing...uppity rich folk moving here and buying dilapidated sub-standard housing in the trendy part of town and dumping upwards of $250-300k in renovations, subsequently raising the prices for all of Austin to the point those of us who qualify as "wealthy" under Obamacare law can't afford to live within 20 miles of downtown.

Comment Re:Stimulus This! (Score 1) 827

I have friends graduating with engineering degrees that have 30k in debt from a STATE SCHOOL.

While I think tuition is ridiculous and a problem, a little perspective is often in order. How many engineers with $30k debt from state colleges do I know that go out and buy a $30k car with their first job? All of them.

If anyone thinks $30k in debt is a life crushing issue, I can't wait for them to grow up and come to the real world. With that, though, I've never understood why kids go to schools that cost upwards of $50k a year, when the giant state college across the street will gladly take 1/5th of that money off their hands and provide the equally useless BA/BS in Anything that most of us have, and what most employers look for (in the professional world).

Comment Re:It is very simple ... (Score 1) 827

I'd be careful making judgments about the earning power of degrees. I have a degree in what most of you left-brainers around here think is useless and are quick to point me to stats indicating Education is a joke. Two of you have even suggested banning it from colleges, as it isn't worth the ROI or some nonsense. I make well over six figures and work 30-40 hours a week, mostly in an air conditioned office, sometimes from my house. I've never one day had to deal with somebody's spoiled child or our jacked up education system.

Just be careful when you start shoving little Johnny, the underwater basketweaving prodigy, into engineering, because you think college should only be about earning potential. Kids should study what their interests are. Jobs and careers will follow.

Comment Re:at some point... (Score 1) 827

...schools piss money into sports...

Colleges piss money into sports for the exact altruistic reasons they piss money into the Paleontology and Art History departments. Some of them have just found a way to make a LOT of money.

Comment Re:at some point... (Score 1) 827

You are mostly correct. A lot of schools lose money in their athletic departments, but most of the top 50ish football programs all make money...a LOT of money. University of Texas makes $100 million a year. The money is compartmentalized for the athletic department, and they don't get to use money from the University non-athletics fund either.

Comment Re:at some point... (Score 1, Interesting) 827

Who said anything about a deficit? If we cut the US military in half, we still have the largest military in the world over the next two largest countries COMBINED. Put that money towards 0% college loans, or grants, or gasp, free state-run universities like the rest of Western Civilization. Who knows? Maybe a well educated society will lead to more income tax revenue through higher paying careers?

Comment Re:cognitive science (Score 1) 418

Maybe everyone starts out roughly the same, maybe they develop at a similar rate, and enjoy similar learning capacities. However, civilization has changed more in the last 100 years than it has in the last 3,000. I'm not even sure how you could quantify that statement.

Easy. Humans of all civilizations at all points in history (say several hundred years) have had fairly similar cognitive capabilities. Sure, we KNOW more now, but that doesn't mean our brains have evolved as such to be better processors of what we've taken in or improved on how to bring those senses in.

>Right now, we can measure reaction times, structural changes and activity in the brain. Until we have a much, much better idea of how the brain processes and stores information, I think this question is approximately unanswerable.

A basic psychology class shows the basics of how the brain processes and stores information. Cognitive science takes it even further. The immediate processing, and short term storage is very well understood. It's the long term storage and recall strategies we are still struggling with, as well as the deeper context of processing beyond moving from sensory input to short term memory and how we process information at higher levels. The great mystery is how the hell our brains actually use the stuff in our heads. How we acquire (sensory input) and how we stick it in there (short term) is well understood.

Comment Re:cognitive science (Score 1) 418

So you never change the station on the radio?? Or glance down to see what your fuel level is?? Or how fast you were going?? Or read billboards or road signs?? Or even glance in your mirrors to check traffic behind you??? Or look beside you to see if you can change lanes? Or glance in your rear view mirror to see what your kids are doing??

These are all single sensory inputs. Nothing about these examples causes sensory overload. There's no listening, processing, responding involved, like when on a phone, or worse, when texting. This is why listening to the radio is not that distracting. This is why listening to talk shows is slightly more distracting than listening to muzak...you start concentrating on the context of the radio and less on the road.

It's not taking your eyes off the road that is dangerous. It is disconnecting your brain from controlling your vehicle to free it up for other cognitive processes like holding a conversation with somebody you can't see, or reading, thinking of a response, then fumbling around with your virtual keyboard at 50mph.

Sure that car ahead may be 100 feet and I can glance at my mirrors. Sure when I look down at that text message and then don't look up again for 5 seconds because I am (happy/terrified/confused/surprised/interested/responding) to said text and the car 100 feet ahead has stopped, I've just plowed into the back of the car.

Let me guess. You text and drive. A lot. Yes, that's me behind you laying on my horn. Public shame is the only solution to this epidemic.

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Working...