Raider5678

I thought the same of Trump.......

He has extensive agenda's on other things. See his healthcare and gun control agenda. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/gun-safety/ https://www.yang2020.com/policies/medicare-for-all/

Go Andrew Yang!!!!! I mean. He get's a passionate voting response from me at least. I feel that he'd fair extremely well against Trump. He has very little baggage, he's straight forward, he's not boring to listen to speak, he's not an absolute a-hole, he has a very good grasp of economics, and even though a lot of what he mentions is a rather extreme idea to conservatives, his arguments are really well laid out. They're not mind boggling complex. Simple, and to the point. I'm not entirely optimistic of Universal Basic Income and how it'll work, but if he were president I wouldn't mind us trying and seeing how it went because it doesn't seem like we're throwing ourselves off a cliff without a plan other then "it sounds good and people applaud."

The economy wouldn't respond like that. I suspect he gets impeached, convicted by the senate, removed from office, thrown in jail, runs for reelection, wins, and voila. We're back to face palming every time we get a twitter notification from the man himself.

All of those regions or some of those regions?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't that giant freaking jump in carbon dioxide around 550 million years ago have increased the average global temperature at least a little?

And yet, with the incredibly fast pace of cultural and technological advancement these days, that 4 years to become a teacher means the students are in a totally different world.

Based on the quote you quoted, we should throw common core out the window. My little brother fails tests quite regularly because I told him not to use the convoluted method they have for adding and subtraction. So for the last 4-5 questions on a test, where they're required to explain their answer, he doesn't get points. They're given an entire page to answer something as simple as 67-13 because of how ridiculous it is. In comparison to how I taught him when he was younger. 67 - 13. Subtract the 3. You get a 4. Subtract the 1. You get a 5. It's 54. Mind blown right? 2 steps. They have something called snap math. Basically, they have 3 minutes to answer every question on a sheet of paper(25 questions.). They keep doing the same paper day after day until they get all the answers right, then they move to the next one the next day. My little brother is first in the grade, around paper ~60. The next closest kid is 20 something(teachers note on his report card). However, because he doesn't do math the way that common core requires they do it, (a convoluted method that is so stupid it should be taken out of the class room and shot, encased in concrete, and launched into a black hole, and then made illegal to look at that black hole, mention it, or think of it.) it's considered wrong. Being narrowly focused on learning is something I believe is a separate issue. But I also know that a lot of students have a hard time with math because they can't focus on it. Add in extra concepts to that, that just distract from the mathematics section of, well, math, I think it'll make it harder for them to focus. By adding in additional concepts in math that a teacher must teach, it further limits them in how they may teach it. Another possible unmentioned issue, is that if math teachers don't like this curriculum and they disagree with it, many of them may simply opt to teach somewhere else. In my high school, introducing things like common core pushed most of the good teachers away. They went to private schools where they make more, and they can actually teach their subject. I feel there is a very good possibility this could do the same. I hated art so much growing up, I would have refused to take a STEAM course. Other people's ideas of what "creativity" is, is so flawed it's laughable. Creativity is when a kid(or adult) creates something they thought of in their head, them selves. Influenced by other things, or not. Either way, creative. It is not the most abstract ridiculous drawing you can make. It's not how you can derive flowers from parabolas. And it's certainly not how to make something "visually appealing". My friend made a calculator that can tell you the answer to every single question on the algebra test, just by taking a picture of the aforementioned question. I don't care if it isn't pretty. In my opinion, it was creative.

SWBAT means "Students Will Be Able To X" and generally means the students are quizzed on the topic to verify that they are able to X. At least when I was in high school. The overall push of this program appears to be more then just a side note used to illustrate things, and I'm against that. Unless you're intending to imply the version they're suggesting won't work, and the farthest this will go will be what you mentioned. I'm not quite sure which one you meant? There were boosts inside of math and science scores for minority students who attended ethnic studies classes. That being said, they weren't integrated into math and science classes directly. While I don't know of the specific boosts of doing so, I'm highly skeptical it should be used as an argument for integrating this without first testing it to see if it yields better results then having a dedicated cultural class.

I don't think K12 is too early to start teaching students about racist behaviors we've had before and the history of our Country. If anything, University shouldn't be the place we're helping students unlearn things. They shouldn't learn them in the first place. That being said, I don't feel like math class is the place for that.

This is a excerpt from Education Week: Education Week reports: The link is here, however be forewarned, this site isn't free. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2019/10/11/seattle-schools-lead-controversial-push-to-rehumanize.html According to the interview with a person who is directly involved in the planning, this is taught IN math class. I didn't notice the link before though. Either way, in light of what Castro-Gill is saying, I'd chalk that up to a bad folder organization. Or someone got confused and thought this belonged in an Ethnic Studies course. For the record, I have absolutely no issue with this being an ethnic studies course. But it's not, it's to be incorporated into the math class.

But then they're unhappy. That's illogical.....I don't get it..... Oh wait. We were taught logic was discriminatory. No wonder. Moving on.

So reading in the news, Seattle has introduced legislation that would create a new math curriculum highlighting how math was used by western civilization in order to subjugate cultures of color. An example would be how numeracy tests were used to screen black voters in southern states. While this is, and will continue to be, taught in history class, it will now also be taught in math class. Additionally, questions will purposefully be framed to cast light on social issues such as the disparity in criminal sentencing, drug sentencing, etc. Furthermore, the math class would also teach students to use different bases, such as base 20, to help make up for the way western civilization have subjugated the mathematical identity of others, such as the Aztecs. The above was gleamed from various news outlets. However, here is the actual PDF document that all this is based off of(it seems more fit to go straight to the actual controversial document then to trust "fake news"*) https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/socialstudies/pubdocs/Math SDS ES Framework.pdf Essentially, the document outlines 4 key areas that math class should focus on. Orgins, Identity, and Agency. Origins, Identity and Agency, as defined by ethnic studies, is the ways in which we view ourselves as mathematicians and members of broader mathematical communities. Mathematical theory and application is rooted in the ancient histories of people and empires of color. All human endeavors include mathematical thinking; from humanities to the arts to the sciences Power and Oppression. Power and oppression, as defined by ethnic studies, are the ways in which individuals and groups define mathematical knowledge so as to see “Western” mathematics as the only legitimate expression of mathematical identity and intelligence. This definition of legitimacy is then used to disenfranchise people and communities of color. This erases the historical contributions of people and communities of color. History of Resistance and Liberation. The history of resistance and liberation, as defined by ethnic studies, is the stories, places, and people who helped liberate people and communities of color using math, engineering, and technology. Access to mathematical knowledge itself is an act of liberation. Reflection and Action. Student action, as defined by ethnic studies, is fostering a sense of advocacy, empowerment, and action in the students that creates internal motivation to engage in and contribute to their identities as mathematicians. Students will be confident in their ability to construct & decode mathematical knowledge, truth, and beauty so they can contribute to their experiences and the experiences of people in their community. Seeing this, one of the major things that jumps out at me is this: "Power and oppression, as defined by ethnic studies, are the ways in which individuals and groups define mathematical knowledge so as to see “Western” mathematics as the only legitimate expression of mathematical identity and intelligence." To me, the idea of teaching students that our way of doing math, isn't the only way you can do math, seems questionable. Perhaps the Aztecs used base 20 to count, and the westernization of that math to base 10 was oppressive, but that doesn't change the fact we use base 10 today**, almost exclusively, around the entire world. Teach them that the Aztecs used base 20. Don't teach them that it's okay if they feel like using base 20 to try and communicate to people, calculate, or write. It's not. It'll basically destroy their life if they refuse to use base 10 in the real world. Oppressive or not, I feel like this is a pill they should swallow and move on with. Additionally, much of the Origins, Identity, and Agency section seems like it should be sent and banished to history class. When I went to school, I would have hated going into math class and being told to go write an essay about how the origins of mathematics were actually from empires of colored people as opposed to learning how to calculate the angle of triangles using trigonometry Other topics seem a rather off topic for a math class. (SWBAT = Students will be able to) SWBAT explain how math has been used to exploit natural resources This is required for learning math...... why? SWBAT identify the inherent inequities of the standardized testing system used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color. Same question as above. Is this topic going to be taught with standardized tests? SWBAT critique systems of power that deny access to mathematical knowledge to people and communities of color. Same question as above. And shouldn't this be taught in civics? How hard is it to say that "Governments that deny mathematical knowledge to people and communities of color = bad." Why is this a concept that must be taught in math? SWBAT identify individuals and organizations that have reclaimed mathematical identity and agency. As defined by whom? What is mathematical identity? 2 + 2 = 4 = cultural oppression? SWBAT re-humanize mathematics through experiential learning and answering “why?”. I literally have no words to describe how I feel about injecting humans into mathematics. I'm not a fan of a lot of people. I don't want mathematics humanized, I feel like it'll ruin it. People ruin a lot of stuff. Thoughts? Quick edit: In full disclosure, I am currently in disagreement against this proposal. In case it wasn't obvious. It could change though. *A joke. Don't kill me. **Yes, I understand computers use binary, and we could say that a majority of math is in base 2. But we, being humans, typically don't write in base 2, we typically don't calculate in base 2, and we typically don't communicate in base 2. Invalid argument exception.

It's idiotic to compare them on every level. It's not idiotic to compare them on some levels. I was simply asking you to compare them on the premise of borrowing money in different circumstances. I feel I've provided an adequate argument why borrowing money for perpetual payments is bad. I also feel that this applies to both family budgets and national budgets. If you have a reason to believe otherwise, then I'm all ears. Saying you're not going to compare them because they're different isn't a logical argument in my opinion.

The point where it becomes impossible to borrow more, is light years after the point where it becomes foolish to borrow more.

This is true. However at some point it becomes impossible to borrow more. I.E, if you keep borrowing money, the interest get's higher and higher. The payments get higher and higher. If your GDP doesn't continue to grow at the same rate, a larger and larger portion of your money is going to paying off loans. The biggest risk is what happens if a recession hits and you're forced to either print crap tons of money, or default on your loans. One can lead to a domino effect of inflation, and one will cause your interest rates to sky rocket. In either case, massive cuts to your spending will be required, and we all know that spending cuts are extremely popular in democracies. A better way to describe it is to think of it in terms of investments. If you borrow money to invest in rebuilding schools and building new trade schools, that's a good case for borrowing money. (In my opinion.) If you borrow money so that you can increase the education budget of schools, that's a bad case for borrowing money. (In my opinion.) The two scenario's are similar, but not the same in a very fundamental way. The first scenario is borrowing money for a large up front investment. The second scenario is borrowing money for a perpetual payment. If you're borrowing money for a perpetual payment, you'll often result in a deficit. A deficit will result in more debt, more debt will result in more interest, and more interest will result in requiring more money to make that interest payment. Requiring more money to make an interest payment will often result in borrowing more money, spending cuts, or finding a way to generate more revenue(often taxes.) Upfront, people will probably not pay as much in taxes. But by the time their grand kids are paying taxes, they'll be paying more taxes just to pay for the payments their grandparents opted for. You can't perpetually borrow money. Heck, think of it at a personal level. If you had to borrow money every year to put towards your rent, and you didn't pay off that borrowed money by the end of the year, but you did make the payment, you'd continually have to borrow more and more money. But since you're making the payment on time, every time, the bank is willing to lower the interest and lend you more money.(Hypothetically). Surely, here, you can see where the process can be drawn out, but won't last forever. However, if you borrow money for a house, and spend 30 years paying it off, eventually the payment goes away, and you're left with a house. That's not a terrible way to borrow money. Borrowing money is not inherently bad. Perpetually borrowing money is. Payments come due. And they'll perpetually grow larger. So unless your economy is growing as fast as/faster than your debt, it simply decreases the financial cushion you have when there's a recession and you still need to make that payment.

Hey, I'm with you dude. I have no clue.

What?

I don't get it. How?

It does work actually. Type the first 4-5 letters of the variable, then hit tab when that variable you want is highlighted, and it almost always gets it right. Visual studio accounts for variable types and it also predicts the variable you're going to use from some sort of artificial intelligence algorithm. Works quite well.

When entering into the Martian system however, you can still use areobraking to reduce your velocity in order to get a capture(extremely risky, for obvious reasons.) From there, assuming you don't have a perfectly circular orbit, your periapsis will be low enough to induce drag when you pass threw it, reducing your apoapsis. This method can be used to save most of the Delta V required to land on mars. That being said, I still don't see it getting below 2-3 km/sec DeltaV, so your point still stands.

I used visual studio, and it has the auto-completion feature. But I've never actually used it. Naming conventions for variables where I work at are usually just "Make sure they're descriptive" not that they follow an order that allows them to be identified faster. That being said we don't program in form 5 much either, so this situation wouldn't apply very often.

However landing on them would be harder. (Yes, harder.) If you're traveling at orbital velocities, it's easier to orbit something the size of Mars then one of those extremely tiny moons. Getting into orbit increases the Delta V required to land on them. Additionally, Mars has an atmosphere. This means you can Areobrake in the atmosphere as you're coming in for a landing, further reducing the Delta V required to land. If Mars will bleed of 1,200 M/S Delta V with it's atmosphere, from orbit, that's 1,200 M/S Delta V(Totally made up. I have no idea how much it actually is, and I"m too lazy to google it at the moment) you no longer need to carry with you in the form of fuel. Additionally, the gravitational issues of living on Mars will be nothing to the gravitational issues of living on one of those moons. And as bad as Mars is at deflecting radiation, those moons will be worse. Overall, the moons are simply a harder target, and harder to establish a colony on.

Is there a point where variable names become too descriptive? For example, would "InsufficientPermissionsErrorString" have sufficed? (Go CamelCase!)