How would you rate the rest of the items in this experiment? Could you rank them based on "pleasure to work with", speed, stability, suitability for large projects, etc?
This reply rings true, but also had me thinking. If rereading those books when you're old enough makes you appreciate them, are they ideal for high school? Do they teach you what's good writing if you can't recognize it yet? Does it make sense to, then, choose different books - books you can appreciate and understand more in high school? I don't have the right answer, but the question seemed relevant.
>> Does it make sense to, then, choose different books - books you can appreciate and understand more in high school?
I guess it depends on the goal. My opinion is that reading hard books at school simply turns people off reading completely. If the reading is fun there's more chance students will carry on reading.
So if the goal is "teach kids that reading is fun. So they do it. Which means their ability to read goes up" , then yes, the books should be more fun.
(We read a Spike Milligan book, which certainly engaged the class more than Wuthering Heights did.)
On the other hand if the goal is to understand "literature", then books with themes and character development and so on is necessary. And of course can put some kids off reading for life.
>My opinion is that reading hard books at school simply turns people off reading completely.
The thing is, most of these books people are complaining about aren't actually 'hard books', especially when read at a chapter or two per week with a teacher guiding you through all the major themes. The goal isn't to teach kids that reading is fun, it's to teach them critical reading skills.
There is something to be said about reaching the students where they are, but we already dumb down things too much to allow the slower students to keep pace. They can learn about reading for fun in remedial reading classes.
It's probably good if the book requires you to stretch a bit, and even if you don't totally get it yet. My parents never put any limits on what I could read, so I stumbled over the Poe shelf at the library at a fairly young age. There was plenty I didn't understand, but plenty that I could, and some stories still stick with me.
But I remember when my niece told us they had them reading Nietzsche. Her main takeaway seemed to be that they were Very Smart because they were reading Nietzsche. She didn't have a clue what she was reading, so if any of it stuck with her, it was probably as likely to be misunderstood as understood.
They have to be able to reach high enough to get some of it. It has to repay their time in high school. It should also show them there's more to reach for, but they need to be able to get some of it.
For me, Gatsby was... not entirely terrible. It was mostly a waste of my time, but looking back I can see some of the themes were at least somewhat worthwhile.
Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man was an absolute waste of my time. If Joyce is worth an adult reading (which I doubt to this day), then don't make high school kids read him.
>This reply rings true, but also had me thinking. If rereading those books when you're old enough makes you appreciate them, are they ideal for high school?
Possibly, good books hit different at different ages and can be appreciated at each of those ages for different reasons.
Indeed. It's a giant, unrecognized problem with pedagogy. Things are taught from the position of already understanding them and the messy confusing process of actually grokking anything is mostly ignored and students are left to figure it out alone.
I really wish I could downvote it, but then I again I would prefer people see it, get appalled and decide that BNPL is even worse than they previously thought. Is there a "begrudgingly upvote" option?
I don't believe the regime in Russia (and potentially many other places) will allow your site to be "out of politics" in the classic western-democratic sense. If I understand correct, it either exists (and in unison with the regime) or it just ... doesn't exist. There might be an option if it's really small, then the FSB simply isn't interested. If it becomes big enough, you don't get the option.
The only connection between "they wanted to understand their own document libraries" and "mass layoffs" is potentially "increased efficiency leads to needing less people for the same job". If there's anything else, please let me know.
And if it's that, then are you suggesting to not implement a certain technological efficiency tool in order to keep (now clearly redundant) jobs? That has never worked long-term in the history of mankind, AFAIK.
I think it's just giving an error because a valid AST can't be made, which means valid bytecode can't be made. "<word> <word>" is only valid syntax if one is a reserved word. `nonlocal(foo)` is just fine, of course.
No, it gives an error because `nonlocal foo` requests that the name `foo` be looked up in a closure, but `f` doesn't have such a closure (the `foo` defined outside the function is global instead). `nonlocal` is the same sort of keyword as `global` but for enclosing functions instead of the global namespace; see also https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1261875 .
Here's the statement checking code, which I believe is pre-AST [1]. I would have to dig more to see if that check is there to prevent invalid AST or to just "help the user" (would depend on how they reference the original variable I suppose).
But wow, that's the first time I've seen "nonlocal". In the ~100 packages I have installed, I see 0 usages!
Well, yes, not a lot of people write closures except perhaps when they implement decorators. So there's ordinarily no non-local scope to worry about. People tend to write classes instead, because that's what's familiar.
As far as I can tell, what you're missing is the massive ease-of-use and approachability, especially for non-technical users, of a web-based graphical "convert X to Y" interface vs. facing command line ffmpeg, which they probably haven't heard of.
I feel this is easier than those solutions in a lot of cases - mainly because you don't need to install anything. Just open website, drag and drop a file, pick target format, done.
All of that. A couple more thoughts. As a project it brings together
energy to a task/configuration: namely that of making sure all those
disparate command-line tools or bits of lib code are brought together
for the specific purpose of serving file translations from some spot
in a transactional fashion. So that's some value.
Why on the front page? That question might also have a non-technical
answer. What's going on in news and events? Who's been setting up file
translators and then "Dude I have over 4,000 soundfiles, pictures,
address-books..." ... "Whoah? Like. howdy manage that one?"
... "People just submitted it. Zuck fucks"
They might be referring just to the fact that it's difficult. I personally don't want to ignore them and I often don't. They're necessary and helpful in the real world, but that doesn't make it any easier.
Because you're buying a plane and the phone is an analogy. Separately, both iPhone and Android have essentially their full functionality available without *paying* for a subscription.
> both iPhone and Android have essentially their full functionality available without paying for a subscription.
This is untrue. iOS ships with several features that you cannot enable without government regulation or an annual developer fee.
Android is Open Source and therefore does have a full feature-set available free of charge. iOS undeniably ships with disabled entitlements that only paying users can access. Whether or not you consider these software limitations salient is debatable, but the fact they exist is concrete.
The F-35 is "essentially" full featured without American support, as long as the functionality you're referring to is the airfoil. We can make all sorts of silly definitions that confer innocence to OEMs, and many of them are both factually and practically wrong.
> Android is Open Source and therefore does have a full feature-set available free of charge.
This is assuming a pretty narrow definition of "full feature-set". It is a inacurrate to say there is feature parity between an Android phone running Google Play Services vs one that is not.
The phrase squared is "powers of two" is much, much more common than you know. I'm part-time substituting as a grade-school teacher. Ask any if they are explaining this difference.
"power of two" with "power" singular perhaps but "powers of two" with the word "powers" plural is really not common as a synonym of squared (excluding people who don't know what they mean at all in the first place)
