https://community.openai.com/t...

Here's a chart from 2010 to 2021 (a bit down the page) which will suit this argument well. You can find others going back to the seventies if you like and it will not help your assertion a bit. I'm using the short table for ease. Surely we can all agree (for the current purposes) with the left that Trump, the Bad Orange Man(TM) is the WORST PRESIDENT EVER and thus his era would have the most draconian cuts those evil Republican scum ever implemented, right? Well LOOK AT THE TABLE. Gaze upon the massive reduction in education spending during his 1st term (2017-2020)!!!

Oh, goodness gracious, (or Golly!, or WTF?) pick your expression to align with your politics....

Yep. That's right. Education spending goes up and up and up every year no matter who is in the White House and no matter which party has the Presidency, or the Congress, or the state Governorship, etc. (well, technically, it dipped a bit during one presidency of the post 1970s... Barack Obama's, but it was not by much and probably did not matter at all) Education spending is the single most-popular normal government spending, other than social security and medicare, in the country and BOTH parties just keep increasing it. The constant chorus that Republicans "gut education spending" (like, presumably, some sort of fish...the imagery is probably useful) is just a huge political lie that works really well for the left when it energizes the teachers to get out there and support Democrat political candidates.

I'm not pointing this out because I think the Republicans are any better on education (I do not believe they are). I'm pointing it out because I believe that Objective reality matters and we CANNOT have honest debates and CANNOT get to any good solutions if we cannot all at least start from a common set of FACTS. I also think we've had enough extreme rhetoric lately, and we all ought to tap the breaks on it - it leads to incredibly dark places. No matter how much we each might like it, we DO NOT each get our own truths.

First, those teachers are, in may places paid quite well when you consider their annual pay and benefits compared to other people of the same educational level and then take into account that they work a LOT fewer days per year. industrial employees in this country, for example, do NOT take months off every year.

Second, and it's a BIGGIE, is that most teachers in the US are government employees, and their unions have negotiated INSANE payouts that most Americans are completely unaware of. The typical teacher in the US can retire after 20 or so years of working... at FULL PAY, and with inflation adjustments. So, if a person starts teaching at 25, retires at 46 or even 50, they often take NO PAY CUT and still keep excellent tax-payer-funded insurance. If they live to be over 70, as a great many do, they end up having taken so much money from the taxpayers that they were effectively paid well over TWICE the amount they were complaining about during their 20 years of teaching. Oh, and since the pay was effectively spread-out over twice the years, they are taxed a lot less on their total haul. I'm not aware of very many private sector employees with anything like that sort of pay and benefits scheme. I have a couple of former teacher relatives who retired the moment they realized they'd suffer NO loss of income by retiring and would no longer have to commute or face a room of kids.

There are 2 points you listed I will at least partially agree on: #4 is too true; the modern school is far too willing to back down in the face of an upset parent. I suspect it's partially due to fears of various ethnic/cultural matters arising (not ACTUALLY arising, just fears of them, and no specific ethnic group presumed) but it's also another problem: earlier generations of PARENTS would back-up the teacher when Johnny or Susie acted badly, and Johnny or Susie KNEW this and behaved in class (this was probably assisted by things like dress codes that used to be in effect). I also agree on #7 that there's entirely too much stuff that can be taught at home that the schools are instead wasting time pushing for political/ideological reasons; the educational system seems bent on creating "the new man" in a dream of creating a Star Trekkian future, but no such future is possible if the kiddies are going to be illiterates with no math skills, no historical knowledge, and no ability to reason.

Parents being satisfied that the schools are good babysitters while they're away at work is no indicator of the quality of the teaching or the curriculum. The fact that the parents have a brief encounter with the teacher, perhaps once, and the teacher seems friendly and the facilities look nice is also not a meaningful gage of anything.

This is why parents approve of THEIR schools while the test results show worse results. Of course, by THIS point, the current generation of parents were, themselves, dumbed-down by their educations in that system a few years earlier and are therefore even less capable of objectively measuring the quality.

It's NOT the same thing, but it is in some ways related to the stats that always show that most people hate congress, but like their own representative...

Anybody who has been in business, particularly in a technical field, for a number of years and has dealt with wave after wave of new employees over the years has probably seen the results of the education system up-close-and-personal.

It ain't pretty.

Over the past 20 years in particular, I have come to dread having to bring in a new young employee; it's like each year brings a new level of stupid. I've had junior people in the past several years hunkering down in their work areas, thinking they're not being seen and heard, calling former classmates and begging for help with tasks that the person in that same spot 10 years earlier would have easily accomplished. I've reached a point where I no longer want people educated in the public schools and instantly favor a home-schooled person. The home-schooled nearly always have better math and English skills, better work ethic, and are more creative and less cellphone addicted. I'll also favor the self-taught over the college-taught any day of the week. I think we've reached a critical point where many profs haven no real world working experience in the fields they're teaching, and are thus pumping-out grads with the wrong skills, used to using the wrong tools and the wrong methods. I'm not interested in wasting the time of senior employees teaching remedial classes to the unskilled with diplomas.

Oh, and I REFUSE to talk to the parents of any of these people. Previous generations went off and fought in SHOOTING WARS at ages 16-20 without mommy and daddy, but the current generation seems to think it's appropriate to get support from mommy and daddy after their college years. [eyeroll]

There was NO drop in education spending during the Reagan years... in fact the ONLY drop in K-12 spending in the US on a year-to-year basis was under Barack Obama. That drop is even more notable when you look at elementary & secondary education, but of course the secondary is not so much what this article is about. Year after year after year, education spending is the thing government has the easiest time raising taxes to fund; parents are often willing to vote for higher taxes even when they're already struggling financially. If you look at those charts and then look at student performance over those same years, you'll realize you're looking at a SHOCKING level of failure, and it only gets worse when you realize that the educational system has, for decades, been trying to hide this by periodically making the testing easier. If the tests had remained at the same difficulty level over the decades, it would be impossible for anybody not in a straight jacket in a padded cell to defend.

Just because some political jerks TALK big about education it does NOT mean they increase funding for it, and just because some others talk about reforming education or cutting the educational bureaucracy, it does NOT mean they're cutting total funding. We have a deeply-entrenched educational bureaucracy in this country that, along with their allies in the two massive teachers unions, squeals like a stuck pig and pretends students will be harmed any time anybody tries to reduce the administrator-to-student ratio. The fact that they're ranting and raving does not, however, mean ANYTHING is being done to reduce the dollars allocated per student as the actual data illustrates.

People need to learn to stop being such easy meat puppets for the political activists within government.

Incidentally, the fact that the standardized brick-and-mortar school house in America got standardized early in the industrial revolution in order to put every American kid into an educational machine and mold them into cookie-cutter diploma-certified high school grads that employers could stuff into any positions in industry like standardized gears in a machine does NOT mean that this is the best model for educating a human being. The one-size-fits-all model served BUSINESS interests well, and probably made military training easier in the era of the draft, but it cannot possibly have served the best interests of the individual human minds being trained in it and by now we probably should write it off as obsolete. The fact that this particular form of schooling serves a large number of ADULTS who work in the system may well be nice for them, but that also does not make it the ideal system that cannot be messed with. The kids should be first, no matter how many adult education workers get hurt feelings or even pink slips. After all, these are the very people who so often insist that THEY care more about the kids than everyone else.

Oh, your idea is that the base model isn't built on ChatGPT or any other model?

[Citation Needed]. I don't know why you think that.

The knowledge is free.

The skilled professionals to persuade the pupil whose civil rights include refusing to learn to absorb it are not.

You can lock a kid in a library but you can't make her think. When ignorance is virtue we have lost.

50 years of shutting down American manufacturing has ensured that strategy is no longer viable for us. The US is a tech and service economy, and there is no way to go back in time without racing to the bottom of the world economically.

A chip that I played with a long time ago can only be programmed through 32-bit register access (limitation of the ARM bus). The address space for I/O peripherals can run out quickly and it's a hassle to move or expand them later. So a lot of small values get tightly packed into the register map. Here's one used for filter coefficients for the display.

Horizontal scaling filter is a 6-tap filter with 4-bit positional phase.
* Coefficients 0 and 5 are 3-bit signed value ranging from -4 to 3.
* Coefficients 1 and 4 are 5-bit signed value ranging from -16 to 15.
* Coefficients 2 and 3 are 8-bit unsigned value ranging from 0 to 128.
* Coefficient 0 is the multiplier for the earliest pixel (P0) in the group of 6-pixel and
* Coefficient 5 is the multiplier for the latest pixel (P5) in the group. The output pixel positional phase is defined as centered in P2 if the positional phase is 0 or proportionally in between P2 and P3 if the positional phase is larger than 0.

(source: 29.10.2 DC_WINC_A_PALETTE_COLOR_EXT_0)

Great news for Canada, Australia, UK, and EU. They have a vibrant tech culture and it will suddenly get a new influx of labor that can bring about a lot of profit for many businesses.

Trump is playing a loser's strategy at globalization. Ultimately the stakes for him personally are low. But your average working class American is going to be hit hard when the money dries up for the fastest grown and fourth largest industry by revenue in the US, the information technology industry.

Any attempts to stop this by legislation will have to be at the Federal level and enforcement will need to go through the FTC, and possibly the FCC. This is clearly an Interstate Commerce issue, and trying to deal with it one state at a time is simply a waste of time and money.

You are half right, supply and demand are market forces.

That argument would carry more weight if you actually posted California's low, low electrical rates.