Eve's Finest Hour
Hi all-
I have uploaded the entire East Seventh Center Volunteer Training Video on YouTube! This was Eve’s project, but of course I provided the hardware, editing and even the scoring. Below is the link for Part 5 (the Finale), but if you click on the “more from this user” link to the right of the display, you will get all 5 parts.
Eve should be very proud of this first attempt, and now I have made it available anytime she needs to ref it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yecTroV6ILE
Monday, February 19, 2007
Yes, it’s true, I finally did it!
After weeks of frustration, I finally got my HP 5440 printer to work with the PIII Laptop (the IBM ThinkPad). I was thrilled...but wait, there’s more! I made the printer a network share, and now I can print from my Compaq PIIII laptop (thanks again Jim), via my home wireless network, from anywhere in the apt. Fantastic! As you may or may not know, a Macintosh computer cannot print to a Windows net share printer, unless that printer is a Postscript (Adobe’s standard publishing page description language) printer. I Googled around the internet and found some open source drivers that emulate postscript drivers for the Mac OS. No problem! I installed said drivers on my Mac laptop and viola! Now I can print, via the wireless network, to the HP 5440, from anywhere in the apt!
Bottom line is this--> The old PIII is now my:
Web Server
File server
Print Server
For every computer in the house. Yea ME!!!
After weeks of frustration, I finally got my HP 5440 printer to work with the PIII Laptop (the IBM ThinkPad). I was thrilled...but wait, there’s more! I made the printer a network share, and now I can print from my Compaq PIIII laptop (thanks again Jim), via my home wireless network, from anywhere in the apt. Fantastic! As you may or may not know, a Macintosh computer cannot print to a Windows net share printer, unless that printer is a Postscript (Adobe’s standard publishing page description language) printer. I Googled around the internet and found some open source drivers that emulate postscript drivers for the Mac OS. No problem! I installed said drivers on my Mac laptop and viola! Now I can print, via the wireless network, to the HP 5440, from anywhere in the apt!
Bottom line is this--> The old PIII is now my:
Web Server
File server
Print Server
For every computer in the house. Yea ME!!!
Sunday, February 18, 2007
OK, I'm disgusted...again. When I was a kid (I sound like my Dad, I know) we actually learned stuff in school. When was your last science class? That “earth sciences” class in 8th grade? Your “health” class in college? COLLEGE! HEALTH! ? ARRRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!
I came across this little gem this a.m.:
Scientific literacy: Americans lead but could do better
Submitted by Vidura Panditaratne on Sat, 2007-02-17 16:44.Africa | Americas | Sci | United States | News
Americans are more scientifically literate than Europeans or Japanese, but 70 percent of them cannot understand the New York Times science section, according to Michigan State University researcher.
Participating in an American Association for the Advancement of Science symposium, titled "Science Literacy and Pseudoscience," MSU’s Jon Miller said that Americans, while slightly ahead of their European counterparts when it comes to scientific knowledge, still have a long way to go.
"A slightly higher proportion of American adults qualify as scientifically literate than European or Japanese adults, but the truth is that no major industrial nation in the world today has a sufficient number of scientifically literate adults," he said. "We should take no pride in a finding that 70 percent of Americans cannot read and understand the science section of the New York Times."
Approximately 28 percent of American adults currently qualify as scientifically literate, an increase from around 10 percent in the late 1980s and early 1990s, according to Miller’s research.
A professor in political science, Miller said one reason for the Americans’ slim lead is that the United States is the only major nation in the world that requires its college students to take general science courses.
"Although university science faculties have often viewed general education requirements with disdain," he said, "analyses indicate that the courses promote civic scientific literacy among U.S. adults despite the disappointing performance of American high school students in international testing."
Adding to the United States’ relatively good showing is Americans’ use of informal science education resources, such as science magazines, news magazines, science museums and the Internet.
Why is it important to have a population wise in the ways of science? Miller listed several reasons, including the need for a more sophisticated work force; a need for more scientifically literate consumers, especially when it comes to purchasing electronics; and, equally as important, a scientifically literate electorate who can help shape public policy.
"Over recent decades, the number of public policy controversies that require some scientific or technical knowledge for effective participation has been increasing," he said. "Any number of issues, including the siting of nuclear power plants, nuclear waste disposal facilities, and the use of embryonic stem cells in biomedical research point to the need for an informed citizenry in the formulation of public policy."
To be classified as "scientifically literate," Miller said one must be able to understand approximately 20 of 31 scientific concepts and terms similar to those that would be found in articles that appear in the New York Times weekly science section and in an episode of the PBS program "NOVA."
What are the 31 concepts???
Some of the questions:
Provide a correct open-ended definition of a molecule
Provide a correct open-ended definition of DNA
Disagree that “Antibiotics kills viruses as well as bacteria”
Disagree that “Lasers work by focusing sound waves”
Agree that “Electrons are smaller than atoms”
Indicate that the Earth goes around the Sun once each year through a pair of closed-ended questions
Disagree that “The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs”
Disagree that “All radioactivity is man-made”
Indicate that light travels faster than sound
Disagree that “Radioactive milk can be made safe by boiling it”
Agree that “The continents on which we live have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move in the future”
Agree that “The center of the Earth is very hot”
Guys, I’m sorry, and I’m not holding myself out as some kind of genius (even though I am), but I knew the answers to all these questions when I was 9 YEARS OLD!!! Not only that, but the last 2 generations of kids don't seem to know SHIT about -
The end is truly near, and I'm just waiting for the bus
I came across this little gem this a.m.:
Scientific literacy: Americans lead but could do better
Submitted by Vidura Panditaratne on Sat, 2007-02-17 16:44.Africa | Americas | Sci | United States | News
Americans are more scientifically literate than Europeans or Japanese, but 70 percent of them cannot understand the New York Times science section, according to Michigan State University researcher.
Participating in an American Association for the Advancement of Science symposium, titled "Science Literacy and Pseudoscience," MSU’s Jon Miller said that Americans, while slightly ahead of their European counterparts when it comes to scientific knowledge, still have a long way to go.
"A slightly higher proportion of American adults qualify as scientifically literate than European or Japanese adults, but the truth is that no major industrial nation in the world today has a sufficient number of scientifically literate adults," he said. "We should take no pride in a finding that 70 percent of Americans cannot read and understand the science section of the New York Times."
Approximately 28 percent of American adults currently qualify as scientifically literate, an increase from around 10 percent in the late 1980s and early 1990s, according to Miller’s research.
A professor in political science, Miller said one reason for the Americans’ slim lead is that the United States is the only major nation in the world that requires its college students to take general science courses.
"Although university science faculties have often viewed general education requirements with disdain," he said, "analyses indicate that the courses promote civic scientific literacy among U.S. adults despite the disappointing performance of American high school students in international testing."
Adding to the United States’ relatively good showing is Americans’ use of informal science education resources, such as science magazines, news magazines, science museums and the Internet.
Why is it important to have a population wise in the ways of science? Miller listed several reasons, including the need for a more sophisticated work force; a need for more scientifically literate consumers, especially when it comes to purchasing electronics; and, equally as important, a scientifically literate electorate who can help shape public policy.
"Over recent decades, the number of public policy controversies that require some scientific or technical knowledge for effective participation has been increasing," he said. "Any number of issues, including the siting of nuclear power plants, nuclear waste disposal facilities, and the use of embryonic stem cells in biomedical research point to the need for an informed citizenry in the formulation of public policy."
To be classified as "scientifically literate," Miller said one must be able to understand approximately 20 of 31 scientific concepts and terms similar to those that would be found in articles that appear in the New York Times weekly science section and in an episode of the PBS program "NOVA."
What are the 31 concepts???
Some of the questions:
Provide a correct open-ended definition of a molecule
Provide a correct open-ended definition of DNA
Disagree that “Antibiotics kills viruses as well as bacteria”
Disagree that “Lasers work by focusing sound waves”
Agree that “Electrons are smaller than atoms”
Indicate that the Earth goes around the Sun once each year through a pair of closed-ended questions
Disagree that “The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs”
Disagree that “All radioactivity is man-made”
Indicate that light travels faster than sound
Disagree that “Radioactive milk can be made safe by boiling it”
Agree that “The continents on which we live have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move in the future”
Agree that “The center of the Earth is very hot”
Guys, I’m sorry, and I’m not holding myself out as some kind of genius (even though I am), but I knew the answers to all these questions when I was 9 YEARS OLD!!! Not only that, but the last 2 generations of kids don't seem to know SHIT about -
- General economic principles, especially how capitalism works viz-a-viz socialism and fascism and
- How their own government works, how a bill becomes law, the role of the 3 branches of government and how they check on each other and
- Practical military and statecraft necessity and yet more, and possibly worst of all
- NO ( and I mean NONE) knowledge of history of any kind. They are taught Asian folklore and African fairy tales and vague insipid generalities about so-called "Hispanic" culture (does ANYONE KNOW WHAT THE HELL THAT IS? I have a PhD in Economic History and I don't have a clue) and nothing about Europe, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, etc.
The end is truly near, and I'm just waiting for the bus
Friday, February 16, 2007
Frame or Be Framed
Signum sine tinnitu--by Guy Kawasaki2/14/07 8:00 AMGuyKawasaki Evangelism, Marketing, and Sales, Pitching, Presenting, and Speaking
George Lakoff is a professor at U.C. Berkeley Linguistics Department. He’s written a book called Don’t Think of an Elephant His message in this interview concerns how Republicans appear to be good “framers” and Democrats are lousy ones. Here are two questions from the interview:
Question: How does language influence the terms of political debate?
Language always comes with what is called “framing.” Every word is defined relative to a conceptual framework. If you have something like “revolt,” that implies a population that is being ruled unfairly, or assumes it is being ruled unfairly, and that they are throwing off their rulers, which would be considered a good thing. That’s a frame.
If you then add the word “voter” in front of “revolt,” you get a metaphorical meaning saying that the voters are the oppressed people, the governor is the oppressive ruler, that they have ousted him and this is a good thing and all things are good now. All of that comes up when you see a headline like “voter revolt”—something that most people read and never notice. But these things can be affected by reporters and very often, by the campaign people themselves.
Question: Do any of the Democratic Presidential candidates grasp the importance of framing?
None. They don’t get it at all. But they’re in a funny position. The framing changes that have to be made are long-term changes. The conservatives understood this in 1973. By 1980 they had a candidate, Ronald Reagan, who could take all this stuff and run with it. The progressives don’t have a candidate now who understands these things and can talk about them. And in order for a candidate to be able to talk about them, the ideas have to be out there. You have to be able to reference them in a sound bite. Other people have to put these ideas into the public domain, not politicians. The question is, How do you get these ideas out there? There are all kinds of ways, and one of the things the Rockridge Institute is looking at is talking to advocacy groups, which could do this very well. They have more of a budget, they’re spread all over the place, and they have access to the media.
Right now the Democratic Party is into marketing. They pick a number of issues like prescription drugs and Social Security and ask which ones sell best across the spectrum, and they run on those issues. They have no moral perspective, no general values, no identity. People vote their identity, they don’t just vote on the issues, and Democrats don’t understand that. Look at Schwarzenegger, who says nothing about the issues. The Democrats ask, How could anyone vote for this guy? They did because he put forth an identity. Voters knew who he is.
This isn’t a political blog (not that my saying this is going to affect the comments but you already know that I believe in open commenting). My goal is to draw lessons from linguistics and apply them to business because it is a very useful marketing technique. For example, “a music-listeners revolt” would imply that record companies are unfairly ruling people who listen to music. This beats the heck out of “piracy,” and the company who provides “relief” for this oppression is logically a hero.
Signum sine tinnitu--by Guy Kawasaki2/14/07 8:00 AMGuyKawasaki Evangelism, Marketing, and Sales, Pitching, Presenting, and Speaking
George Lakoff is a professor at U.C. Berkeley Linguistics Department. He’s written a book called Don’t Think of an Elephant His message in this interview concerns how Republicans appear to be good “framers” and Democrats are lousy ones. Here are two questions from the interview:
Question: How does language influence the terms of political debate?
Language always comes with what is called “framing.” Every word is defined relative to a conceptual framework. If you have something like “revolt,” that implies a population that is being ruled unfairly, or assumes it is being ruled unfairly, and that they are throwing off their rulers, which would be considered a good thing. That’s a frame.
If you then add the word “voter” in front of “revolt,” you get a metaphorical meaning saying that the voters are the oppressed people, the governor is the oppressive ruler, that they have ousted him and this is a good thing and all things are good now. All of that comes up when you see a headline like “voter revolt”—something that most people read and never notice. But these things can be affected by reporters and very often, by the campaign people themselves.
Question: Do any of the Democratic Presidential candidates grasp the importance of framing?
None. They don’t get it at all. But they’re in a funny position. The framing changes that have to be made are long-term changes. The conservatives understood this in 1973. By 1980 they had a candidate, Ronald Reagan, who could take all this stuff and run with it. The progressives don’t have a candidate now who understands these things and can talk about them. And in order for a candidate to be able to talk about them, the ideas have to be out there. You have to be able to reference them in a sound bite. Other people have to put these ideas into the public domain, not politicians. The question is, How do you get these ideas out there? There are all kinds of ways, and one of the things the Rockridge Institute is looking at is talking to advocacy groups, which could do this very well. They have more of a budget, they’re spread all over the place, and they have access to the media.
Right now the Democratic Party is into marketing. They pick a number of issues like prescription drugs and Social Security and ask which ones sell best across the spectrum, and they run on those issues. They have no moral perspective, no general values, no identity. People vote their identity, they don’t just vote on the issues, and Democrats don’t understand that. Look at Schwarzenegger, who says nothing about the issues. The Democrats ask, How could anyone vote for this guy? They did because he put forth an identity. Voters knew who he is.
This isn’t a political blog (not that my saying this is going to affect the comments but you already know that I believe in open commenting). My goal is to draw lessons from linguistics and apply them to business because it is a very useful marketing technique. For example, “a music-listeners revolt” would imply that record companies are unfairly ruling people who listen to music. This beats the heck out of “piracy,” and the company who provides “relief” for this oppression is logically a hero.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)