144 karma · joined May 5, 2014
http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/DFW_present_tense.html
https://reverseengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/3919/...
Just kidding - looks pretty awesome!!
That small criticism aside, I'm very curious how developing for sandstorm would be different from from developing for a typical host. Anyone know the major differences?
If you can affect water with a small magnet like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FvWtEdY4sE
Then a magnetic field of sufficient power would probably kill you long before the effects described in the article. I'm amazed that someone other than me has thought about this!
And the judgements against her parents are unfortunate. This is one family doing something different. We need more people willing to do interesting things with their educational choices, not less. This is not something a parent would do lightly, without taking great care to discuss with her what she wants. Her parents probably know her far better, and care far more for her well being then anyone here does!
As far as missing out on liberal arts/other subjects... 1) she is still going to take high school online, and 2) it's not like high school education is all that great. A person could do better off teaching themselves at khan academy, and listening to history podcasts, and reading books that interest them.
I'm amazed how critical people are being, who know nothing about the person or situation.
The idea of a single global culture is a pretty dark path, historically speaking. It is a utopian concept that assumes there is a path that can be followed in order to pursue a more perfect mankind. It stems from the belief that ambiguity and difference are negative forces, to be eliminated instead of embraced.
I think the argument is that the darker historical paths were 'simulation' where 'emulation' would be a better model. The difference (from what I could tell) being that the underlying mechanism of cultural change are copied, instead of just the effects. It could be argued that this is already taking place - the massive reach of the internet is expanding so that more people are being influenced by the same information streams. Internet culture makes the assumption, predictably, that internet culture is good/best. But what if that isn't true? What about those who don't fit into the 'internet' cultural norms?
The author talks of of making subjective judgements about the optimal performance of certain cultures. That's a bit problematic. What about the cultures that are not "optimal performers"? What is optimal? Those who work the most hours? Those who laugh the most? Those who have the least number of fistfights? Those with the greatest GDP?