> ...keeps pulling you down the rabbit hole. So at the end of the video you know that you don't know stuff you either think you knew or didn't know existed. And then you start looking up Wikipedia and just getting lost in the music.
Education as entertainment means that the goal is to get the consumer to feel good about himself, to feel like he learned something. You're getting paid (in money or kudos or whatever) to engage the consumer's narcissism, not his curiosity.
This is a profound observation. I’m not sure it only applies in entertainment.
I’ve heard it put other ways, but your version, if applied to education as a whole, might be a pretty big deal. There’s no shortage of evidence, either; from Ivy League campuses to niche interest subcultures.
Maybe “narcissism” isn’t the best word, but some sort of similar tension related to confidence seems to be associated with successful educational environments. We commonly attribute it to a one-way causal relationship, but you’re articulating the opposite. Likewise, we are used to acknowledging that ‘not giving up’, or ‘belief in one’s self’ is a necessity, but again you’re making a separate claim.
You’re saying, in so many words, the confidence in and of itself defines the will as well as the curiosity. And I can’t argue with it. I want to, but I’m not sure I can.
I feel like the key thing about a "growth oriented mindset" or some near-equivalent buzzword is that the normal state of affairs to not know things. This is the foundation (in Socrates) of our civilization.
What I've been trying to articulate here and there in the past few weeks that the object of intellectual development should be acquiring structured ways of not knowing. Rigorous mathematics is such a way: in basic analysis class you get red marks for thinking you know things you can't prove. The buddhism of the Heart Sutra is another: the Heart Sutra boils down to "we want to know big truths about emtpiness and suffering to transcend it and achieve Nirvana, but because of emptiness there's no way to know and nothing to know; therefore, recite these magic words because that's what wise men do". (It sounds like a scam, but it's really deep in how the argument is actually made in length).
This of course runs counter to beliefs in "ultratechnology" such that we'll soon soon craft our own transcendence. But eh, we shall fight in the shade.
I don’t think I agree, but ultimately only feel comfortable speaking for myself.
I’m fairly new to programming so would be interested in hearing if someone else does this too...
On a walk this afternoon (for some reason), I realized I had a visual shape in my head for most design patterns. Some of them look a lot like a knot-tying diagram, for example. I’m not sure I had realized that before.
I also realized the shape representations are about as close to implementation as I would prefer to store design patterns in my mind. Beyond that, they might be limiting or, at worst, strenuous to use as guidelines. They’re surely more useful (to me) than UML or even code.
But the best part is I can tell they’ve been there all along. I wasn’t trying to make them up. I was just mapping out a project while on a walk. I was pretty relaxed at the time and maybe that’s why this came up.
For what they are, I was a little disappointed how long it took to parse the Elements of Reuseable OO Software book when I was just learning to code. And then when I had used the patterns and knew them, I found it a bit sad they were communicated through such rigid forms.
Art actually contends with the same sort of conceptual divisions. There’s the medium which is rigid and cumbersome, the form which is more pure, critical in the abstract but medium-agnostic, and the application, being the interface or the thing out in the world.
So I do agree the ability to transpose these concepts between form and implementation is what matters, but it’s the back and forth that matters, not where one begins.
Technically, it looks like the minimum age requirement is 4.
From his website, which is linked to in another comment:
Is This Legal?
Yes! According to the Vermont Constitution and the Vermont Attorney General, you only have to have lived in Vermont for 4 years or more on the day before the election. Ethan has lived here for 14 years.
I'd rather vote in someone who is young and perhaps naive, if they happen to be altruistic and are at least attempting to work for the common good to the best of their ability... in contrast to (some but not all) more experienced candidates who know how to kiss babies and work a crowd, but who are ultimately making promises they don't intend to deliver on, in order to gain a position of power for selfish reasons.
At the very least, this guy probably has better written and verbal communication skills than certain well-known politicians... seems like a decent start.
The hard parts of voting systems are keeping 1 ratios 1 of voter and vote and preserving individual voter anonymity. Blockchains don't solve either problem better than paper, and if you're not careful you end up introducing subtle new voting problems (you should not be able to prove who you voted for -- _even_ if you hold a special credential) and shiny new operational problems like key distribution. All of this is at best a ton of risk for ostensibly very little benefit; at worst, your democracy is now owned by some rando with an Android 0day.
Okay, let's start with the idea that it isn't ridiculous. For the sake of argument, let's say a blockchain-based voting system could be as verifiable as paper.
So what problem does it solve? What does the blockchain accomplish that a paper ballot does not? And what are the costs in terms of user interface and voter education, relative to paper?
It makes voting faster and less expensive (practically free). That means you could have the public voting at arbitrary frequency. You could imagine a system where the public is voting every month, week, or day on what the country should do next.
I'm not saying this would be good necessarily, only that such a technology would enable fast, frequent, continuous control distributed across the population. Such a country would be very different from anything that exists today.
This is assuming that the system would be inherently trustworthy and trustable with no human oversight. I have a nagging suspicion that over time this system would still settle in a state where we have just as many humans involved in ensuring everything is kosher as we have now, but compounded with a system that is less transparent for someone who is blockchain illiterate.
Assuming that voting would become effectively free, the second point does sound quite intriguing. It's the sort of direct democracy that is practiced by some countries (e.g. Switzerland). It does require a certain level of voter education though - so people look at the longer term. Otherwise you'll never push through an initiative that raises taxes for example.
There are a large number of technical issues with blockchain voting. The thing about public key cryptography is that it is easy to create a new identity. But in a voting system you need to trust that each voter is a citizen and that they only vote once. This means that public keys of the citizens need to be securely collected by a government authority (for example your local DMV).
Plus we would need culture changes around key management, so that non-tech-literate people can create and protect keys. Which means the people would need some standard for secure hardware to generate keys and sign ballots. Which means we'd need some government standard for "trusted hardware", and that would quickly become an attack vector.
Only after all of that would it be possible for the government to trust votes via public key cryptography. And as Jacob says, the important thing is that the _public_ has trust in the vote, regardless of what government officials believe.
Does video editing or After Effects work could as home use yet? Video editing, in terms of cutting and splicing clips, is not going to benefit much from this chip, but a lot of effects rendering will benefit, and basic video editing uses a lot of effects these days.
16-thread Threadripper is mostly idle in my video-editing tests. I mean, its a great processor. But video editing isn't "heavy enough" for me to recommend a 16-core or bigger processor.
Yeah don’t get me wrong. They pretty much all are. But, a few key ones aren’t, depending on the host app, and aftermarket plugins have a lot of multi threading support.
