Page 2 of 4
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 9:49 am
by Leisher
Just think, if Real Networks hadn't turned down the guy with the idea for the iPod, Apple might already be dead, and Jobs looked at in a different light.
I think the thing that hits me the hardest wasn't his contributions to the tech world, but his wealth and age. Death does not give a fuck who you are or what you've done.
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 4:39 pm
by thibodeaux
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 4:49 pm
by GORDON
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 4:52 pm
by GORDON
This is touching, but...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44801831/displaymode/1247/?beginSlide=1
Interesting that in a climate of half the country hating rich CEOs, that one could be so beloved by the same people.
Edited By GORDON on 1317934609
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 8:44 am
by thibodeaux
I guess Jobs will rise from the dead sometime tomorrow, right?
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:55 am
by TPRJones
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:17 am
by thibodeaux
Just read that Dennis Ritchie is gone. Who's the 3rd?
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:58 am
by TheCatt
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:50 pm
by TPRJones
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:16 pm
by thibodeaux
I absolutely loathe the stereo-typical Mac user, but even I have sense enough to know that Steve Jobs was pretty influential.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:49 am
by TheCatt
Steve on Education
In conversations with President Obama and Bill Gates, Steve Jobs often came back to the idea that education should be revolutionized. Lectures should be watched on computers or iPads at home after school, and class time should be reserved for discussion and problem-solving. He also had plans to reinvent the textbook for the digital age, turning blocks of dry prose into moving, animated lessons.
"The process by which states certify textbooks is corrupt," he told Isaacson. "But if we can make the textbook free, and they come with the iPad...we can give them an opportunity to circumvent the whole process and save money.
Agree, agree, and agree.
With my daughter, we've been using the iPad kinda in this way. We'll work with her on the concept, and how to solve the problem (addition, subtraction, spelling), and then use the iPad as a way to work through the exercises and drills. Some of the programs even have built-in "lectures" reminding her how to work through certain concepts. It kinda kills me that she'll have to go to public schools next year.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:34 pm
by thibodeaux
TheCatt wrote:It kinda kills me that she'll have to go to public schools next year.
She doesn't HAVE to.
Interestingly, a lot of Silicon Valley types don't think technology is the key to education:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011....it.html
LOS ALTOS, Calif. — The chief technology officer of eBay sends his children to a nine-classroom school here. So do employees of Silicon Valley giants like Google, Apple, Yahoo and Hewlett-Packard.
Grading the Digital School
But the school’s chief teaching tools are anything but high-tech: pens and paper, knitting needles and, occasionally, mud. Not a computer to be found. No screens at all. They are not allowed in the classroom, and the school even frowns on their use at home.
Edited By thibodeaux on 1319474077
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:00 pm
by TheCatt
Great, more liberal arts kids who'll graduate with crappy degrees, and occupy something.
Or maybe make dog sweaters.
On a recent Tuesday, Andie Eagle and her fifth-grade classmates refreshed their knitting skills, crisscrossing wooden needles around balls of yarn, making fabric swatches
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:06 pm
by GORDON
There is no way in hell that technology is the key to education.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:34 pm
by TPRJones
Of course technology isn't the key to education. It's just a tool, and a distribution platform. Good teaching is the key to education.
But technology could greatly increase the number of students that can be served by a good teacher. Which even if it dilutes the experience a little is still a hell of a lot better than using shitty teachers. Of which there are WAY too many.
My own personal experience both as a student and from working at a community college is that about 90% of teachers are way too shitty at it.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:35 pm
by thibodeaux
The biggest factor in successful eduction is the brain of the student. And the fact is that 50% of kids are below average.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:45 pm
by TheCatt
GORDON wrote:There is no way in hell that technology is the key to education.
Right. Technology is the key to driving, mass production, communication, food production and every single thing we do, but it's not the key to education.
Is it a holy grail? An answer unto itself? Certainly not. But technology is something that can be leveraged to provide WAY better teaching and instruction than kids receive today. 1 teacher can only teach 25 students so much, but each of them, with their own customized learning platform, responding to their individual needs and growth, can do so much more.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:39 pm
by GORDON
TheCatt wrote:GORDON wrote:There is no way in hell that technology is the key to education.
Right. Technology is the key to driving, mass production, communication, food production and every single thing we do, but it's not the key to education.
My (our?) generation is the only example you need. We went to school learning on blackboards with chalk and erasers. We had printed-word text books (of which there is now a problem, but different subject), and we had teachers. We occasionally got paddled when we got out of line, then typically were still in deep shit with our parents when we got home for whatever infraction we incurred.
I remember the first time I sat in front of a computer and touched a keyboard, it was 8th grade. TRS-80 Model III.
10 PRINT, "Steve "
20 GOTO 10
RUN <RETURN>
I remember the feeling I had, that computers were going to be a big part of my future. I didn't need to be given an ipad in 1st grade to become proficient with technology, I just needed a good brain, the ability to learn, and a modicum of enthusiasm. Not all kids will have those things, no matter how much tech is thrown at them in the womb.
I would go so far as to say too much tech at too young an age is actually detrimental to intellectual development.
And I think this is officially a derail on the thread.
Edited By GORDON on 1319481667
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:13 pm
by TheCatt
I guess we should keep them away from TV, indoor plumbing, radio, newspapers, and other fancy tech too.
I do not agree with statements about keeping kids away from tech at all. I think kids need balance, and should certainly be playing free in the outdoors/woods/etc as well, but technology is a tool, and the more proficient people are, the better.
I have the same memory you do, but I was 6 at the time.
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:14 pm
by thibodeaux
TheCatt wrote:Right. Technology is the key to driving, mass production, communication, food production and every single thing we do, but it's not the key to education.
You make a good point. And this is probably why both health care and education costs have risen over time, while the cost of everything else has dropped. We have scaled productivity in everything else, but failed with these two. The question is: have we failed because it's impossible (or merely extremely hard) to do, or because we haven't really tried.
I think there are good arguments on both sides. For example, maybe we have failed because of teacher unions, credentialing, gatekeepers, and other forms of preserving the status quo. On the other hand, maybe health care and education are substantially different in some way; like, maybe they have to be tailored too much for the individual consumer.
I honestly don't know. However, I am fairly confident that regardless of the answer, technology will NOT make dumb kids into brain surgeons and rocket scientists (or even programmers and accountants), yet most of the people pushing technology in schools don't really address this. Instead, it's all a bunch of happy-clappy "the children are our future." That's true, and unfortunately, we're headed for idiocracy.
