we should teach them these things directly, instead of relying on science classes
Ok, so by “these things” you mean logic, argument analysis, media literacy, critical thinking, etc.
Yes, I had classes like that, and I think they’re much more important than science and math classes. You can learn science and math on your own from YouTube videos, but you need the media literacy to know which YouTube videos you can trust.
It sounds like they lost you in 3 months, not immediately.
They work, but there are no humans inside them.
It’s amazing how complicated just the O2 cycle is. Basically, we don’t yet how to do it without a whole planet being involved.
Like, plants do release O2 sometimes, but they also use O2 as fuel when they grow. Growing a plant requires light. On the earth that’s easy, just put it in the sun. On Mars there’s no atmosphere and no magnetic field, so if you just put a plant on the surface they’ll die. So, you need to grow them underground in a mostly earth-like atmosphere at mostly earth-like pressure lit by artificial lights.
So, you plant a lot of plants deep underground lit by bright artificial lights. Then you need to supply the plants with a lot of water. Some of that water will be released into the air, but some of it will be incorporated into the plant’s body. There’s a whole water cycle that isn’t yet fully understood.
What about the soil? On earth worms and other bugs break down leaf litter and other things into usable soil and bees pollinate many of the plants. So, do you ship up a bunch of bugs? You’d have to supply a whole ecosystem of them so they live in balance. You could go with hydroponics instead, but then you’d need a constant supply of nutrients for the plants, and given the amount of plant matter needed for just one human, that would be a huge supply of nutrients.
I’d love to see another honest, scientifically rigorous attempt at a biosphere project. Building a closed ecosystem on Earth is easy-mode compared to doing it anywhere else, but so far all the Biospheres have been failures. IMO until we can easily do it on Earth, we’re nowhere near ready to do it in space, on the moon, or on another planet.
You can claim that there are requirements that are not mentioned anywhere in any of the instructions given to the students, but there’s no evidence for that in what they were actually given.
I fully agree that her paper is shitty. But, the ways in which it’s shitty aren’t criteria for the assignment, other than the bit about “is the paper clearly written”. I’d hate to give a hateful girl who did such sloppy work a passing grade, but I can’t see how you can claim her shitty writing didn’t mostly meet the criteria as listed.
IMO a reasonable grading rubric would be something like:
Both teachers make comments saying something like “you are being asked to support your ideas with empirical evidence”. If that’s true, it certainly wasn’t in the instructions the students were given. They were only asked for a “thoughtful reaction or response”. You could twist the idea that “thoughtful” is supposed to mean “supported by empirical, scientific evidence”, but it really doesn’t sound like that was the assignment at all. Maybe if every other assignment had been graded that way, and it was well known that a “reaction paper” had to use scientific evidence, and that “thoughtful” meant “carefully citing scientific evidence”, but as it is, it just looks like a really shitty paper that nevertheless meets the requirements of a really sloppy assignment.
Well, the TA does a pretty good job explaning where it is lacking.
Again though: Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? The TA talks about things that aren’t on the grading rubric, or if they are they fall under “bad writing” which is only worth 5 points.
It’s been around since the 1980s. If you didn’t know it it’s not because you’re a millennial, it’s because you weren’t part of the right subcultures when you were young / teen / 20s.
In what sense did she not do the assignment? Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? Her rhetoric may be flawed, but that wasn’t part of the assignment. You could argue that flawed rhetoric is bad writing, but that’s only 5 points of the assignment out of a total of 25.
Let’s take a step back and look at the assignment itself.
Given how terrible the assignment was, just about anything should pass as long as it’s clear the student read the article and thought about it. Even if their writing is shitty, that’s only 5 points.
Did she demonstrate that she read the article? I guess so. She didn’t quote from it, and only talked about a couple of aspects, like teasing as a way to enforce gender norms, and that encouraging diverse gender expressions could improve students’ responses. But, if that’s what’s in the article, she clearly demonstrated that she did read the article. I don’t know what a 10/10 would be in “show a clear tie-in”, given that it’s only a 650 word essay and you’re told not to summarize. But, it seems pretty clear she read it and that she wrote about what’s in the thing she read, so 8/10.
Did she write a thoughtful reaction to what she read, rather than a summary? Well, yeah. She didn’t summarize the article at all. You can argue how thoughtful her response was, but she engaged with the ideas in the article and reacted to them, just as she was asked to do. If thoughtful means “did you question your own beliefs”, then it wasn’t thoughtful. But, if thoughtful means “did you read the article and have thoughts, which you expressed”, then yes. 7/10.
Is the paper clearly written? It’s pretty shitty writing, 2/5. Luckily for her, how well it’s written is only 5/25 points.
So, 17/25 points for a shitty essay which, nevertheless, fully meets the requirements for a shitty assignment.
Don’t accidentally get the bdsmgames package instead, that’s for a different kind of game.
My guess is that you didn’t put on the jumper properly and accidentally shorted them out. I know I shorted out things back in those days by putting jumpers on wrong. But who knows, you might be right. It was so long ago and the effects of getting a setting wrong were often so much more serious back then.
problem there is getting the entire industry on board, you inevitably run into the “now we have 1 more standard”-problem
True, but, this is one way where the near monopolies in the PC space are an advantage. If Nvidia makes the change on their own, all the motherboard companies would have to follow suit. If Nvidia worked with AMD it would effectively be a standard already.
Nvidia might want to do it as it stands because their main market these days is data center “GPUs” which are nothing like the gaming cards, so if they could make their gaming cards look more like the datacenter “GPUs”, they could possibly save some design time.
Physically smaller, but that’s only because they’re still designing it to be compact, where the motherboards are designed to be spread out. We’re still basically using the same setup that was used for the Voodoo VGA graphics cards in the 1990s, but the cards have more and more powerful, but also bigger and bigger.
It would be really nice if they re-thought the way the second computer connected to the first, and gave people more control over that second one. For example, mount the graphics card parallel to the motherboard instead of perpendicular, and give it more space to spread out so it’s easier to cool. And, speaking of cooling, allow us to mount our own coolers on the more easily. My graphics card is by far the loudest fan in my case. I want a quiet computer, so I want to be able to put a Noctua fan on my GPU, not just my CPU.
I haven’t bought a GPU in years, but it’s absurd how they all seem to now take 3 slots.
The motherboard architecture really needs a revision in the modern GPU world. Instead of balancing it in a tiny slot, it should be stacked parallel with the motherboard and supported on all 4 corners (and possibly in the middle too to prevent sagging) similar to how the Raspberry Pi world has Pi Hats which go on top of the main board.
Physically assembling it is still fairly difficult. There’s the physical effort of wrangling a heavy heatsink or a huge graphics card into place while being gentle so you don’t bend or break any of the connectors. There’s plugging in all the cables in a tight space where you can’t always clearly see. There’s knowing which cable goes where when the labeling is small and all the cables look basically the same. There’s the challenge of knowing when a cable or a card is properly seated, knowing how much you can push to get something locked into place, without pushing too much and breaking it.
It’s harder than lego, but it’s not rocket surgery.
It warned you about that, but I don’t think actually frying a monitor was common. I was cautious, but I still made mistakes and gave it values that my monitor couldn’t handle, but the worst that happened was a dangerous sound coming out of the monitor and no useful picture on the screen. I immediately shut off my monitor when that happened, but it didn’t do any permanent damage.
Probably a cheaply made monitor might have issues, but well built monitors had hardware protection against invalid settings.
Yeah, that never happened. Smoke coming out of the drive would require a short, or power where power isn’t supposed to go.
Then they are going to be put in special classes with other unvaccinated
In the same school? That’s not going to achieve much.
Going to a restaurant, vaccinated or unvaccinated seating?
Will that work as well as a “smoking section” and a “non-smoking section” in a restaurant? We tried that, it didn’t work.
Games like System Shock and Deus Ex are examples of “FPS” games with alternatives to shooting. Those kinds of games are completely my jam. I love to find a way to complete the whole level without ever firing a shot. The Deus Ex remake had an achievement for passing a level without ever being spotted in an unauthorized place, never setting off an alarm, etc. It also had one for completing a level without killing anybody. It took 5x as long, but I made sure to get both those achievements on every level.
I’m sure the id software crew knew what they were doing, and the market for demon-murdering FPS games is probably much bigger than the market for First Person Sneakers. OTOH, there are currently a glut of FPS murder games, so there’s probably a real niche for someone who’s willing to create a game where shooting is possible, and happens sometimes, but stealth and nonviolence is also an option.