holonomically

There is no way to fail in what I'm proposing because there are no grades. Everyone gets feedback on how to improve and students can receive all the help they need to keep up with the curriculum.

Then maybe it should be $36k.

Great, glad we cleared that up.

Then I don't really understand what you're arguing about.

My position is that kids should be taught math at an earlier age and schools should be properly staffed and funded to ensure positive learning outcomes for all students regardless of their socio-economic background because that will lead to more equal life outcomes.

> Oleg owes his friend, Ivan, 100 rubles. Oleg has only 50 rubles. How many more rubles (x) does Oleg have to get to repay Ivan?

50 + x = 100 ↔ x = 100 - 50 = 50. I definitely linked to something that has word problems that can be converted to algebraic equations in 1 unknown.

I didn't say anything about "uniform success".

Really? Setting up equations with unknown variables and solving them is not algebra?

Your interpretation of what I was saying was clearly adversarial and uncharitable so I just got tired of it. It's entirely possible to have high standards for everyone (including the "stupid") without reducing the quality of the curriculum. But you're not interested in having that discussion because you're grinding some other axe about what you perceive to be the ideological takeover of the educational system.

Yes, thanks. That clears it up. You're right. We must teach no one anything otherwise there would be some people that wouldn't be able to understand. That was exactly what I was thinking and your example helped me understand. What you were saying was clearly tautological and I just didn't have the logical training to understand it.

Yes, this is probably what is happening. Schools are understaffed and underfunded so programs keep getting cut. At this point it really just might be better to let kids learn from Khan Academy since the adults clearly have no idea what they're doing.

I don't see how that follows.

I don't know if that's what's going on. I suspect some haven't really sat down to think about what exactly they believe and why. Most seem to be parroting various mantras I've seen expressed on Twitter and Reddit without having thought about the implications of what they're parroting.

No one in any of my classes was a prodigy. We had good teachers that cared about the students (and parents that were involved in their children's education). But I do think we should have had more musical training than just choir singing.

Spend some extra time figuring out why they're struggling. But I suspect what you have in mind is something else, something more along the lines of leaving them behind.

Talk about what?

What's the fallacy in teaching everyone the same things? That seems like a good way to equalize life outcomes and give everyone the required skills for succeeding in contemporary society.

I still don't follow. What exactly in what I suggested is the problem with equalizing outcomes? If everyone is learning the same things then what exactly is the problem? There is no discrimination involved.

I don't understand what this means. Where I went to school there were no gifted programs but we all were doing algebra and word problems much earlier than in the US. If people want consistent outcomes then teach everyone the same thing and hold everyone up to the same standards by investing more resources in students that are underachieving. That to me seems like a much better way of equalizing outcomes.

Yup, even 2x2 systems of equations. This stuff isn't hard, I don't get what the folks in the US are thinking.

Good question. I think Scott wants quantum computers to happen so he's motivated to hype up claims of quantum supremacy.

I was doing algebra and Russian math word problems in 4th grade (maybe earlier, it's been a while). What exactly is the logic of pushing back mathematical training to later grades? [1]

1: https://www.edhelper.com/geography/Russia_Math1.htm

Presented without comment.

Input: move(1,X,Y,_) :- write('Move top disk from '), write(X), write(' to '), write(Y), nl. move(N,X,Y,Z) :- N>1, M is N-1, move(M,X,Z,Y), move(1,X,Y,_), move(M,Z,Y,X).

Output: - The code starts by writing "Move top disk from X to Y". - Next, the code writes "N is N-1", which means that it's moving the next disk down. - The code then moves the first disk up and writes "move(M,X,Z,Y)". - This means that it's moving M disks down and Z disks up. - Then it moves 1 disk left and writes "move(M,Z,Y,X). – - The code will move the top disk from 1 to 2.

This is a silly project.

We're probably headed for a recession. The pandemic showed me that most of my consumption was driven by anxiety and my guess is that other people are starting to realize the same thing. The current economy can not survive without anxiety driven consumption and once consumption growth starts to stall the rest of the economy will follow. But I could be wrong. [1]

1: https://www.conference-board.org/research/us-forecast

I'm not interested in people that think they're constantly being dismissed and persecuted.

Good points.

That's good news. Looking forward to the performance improvements.

We can start with social networks and then move on to search engines. Interoperability for social networks is already solved so it's a matter of getting the politicians on the same page to force Facebook/Meta and Twitter to support the protocols. [1][2]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActivityPub

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software)

Great, then we're all in agreement but it might be worthwhile for the rest of the folks in this thread to read a few wiki pages about the immune system and how vaccines work. It would reduce a lot of confusion for them.

I guess it doesn't hurt. I personally don't follow gossip about billionaires so seems like a waste of money if that's why they do it.