skinnybatch

as the author mentions below, this is his effective internal model, and his sharing it simply offers the opportunity for anyone else to read it, think about it, and take and apply what works for him or her.

that said, for me, it's not so easily applicable to interactions with others, such as with Bob and Alice. for issues in my own peabrain, i can try and logically explore the bases for my emotions, my triggers, and possible alternate solutions, which i can apply at any point in a particular journey or task. i have the ability and choice to attempt to alter my own course, in terms of actions and reactions, any time i start to be plagued by and cognizant of my own discomfort. in interactions with others, however, the applicability is limited. unfortunately, it rests on having the ability to understand the complex nuances of someone else's emotional triggers, subconscious or unconscious, and having some sort of reliable heuristic to predict their reactions and digressions.

personally, i don't have an issue with the simplification to positive/negative outcomes. sort of reduces emotional processing and synaptic fires to binary code, or an electrical circuits with switches and AC current.

my only issue with this has to do with the occasional lapse in recognition of the touch ID. if it can't read your fingerprint several times, it asks for your password code. touch ID is of course not theft-proof, but initially it's a slightly greater obstacle than a simple numeric code.

i pictured a kid having swallowed one, and being unusually attracted to the refrigerator…

i think parents will freak out as a general rule, but parents also have the responsibility not to give toys to their children that are not age appropriate, and/or with which, they cannot be sure their children will play responsibly. i'm sure there are a lot of kids for whom this won't be a problem, and they are seemingly punished for what has happened to others. I sort of resent the mindset that a federal commission should make sure that a commission becomes responsible for drawing parenting guidelines, and that rather than parents stepping up and taking responsibility for supervising and being involved with their children and playtime, the alternative is not to have toys on the market that are more mature in nature. Parents shouldn't have to waste their time teaching their kids to have a greater respect for natural things and toys; we should just simply ban them. You know, to avoid confusion.

I didn't say that. I believe that there are psychological benefits that have physical implications, and physical effects with psychological implications… As in depression can result in physical pain, and chronic pain can result in depression.

I'd argue this is a psychological benefit...

Wholeheartedly agree. Specific to the actual trial and error, of programming, when I first started learning C++ (a long time ago), I remember the dread of running the debug. Then coming up with a small number of errors in 10's of 1000's of lines of code, and having to comb through to see where I was missing a semi-colon… I think knowing to how to code from ground up is so important. Knowing the fundamentals, and not just knowing how to manipulate someone else's platform. Once you know how to do it, you can make the choice to take shortcuts, but if you start with the shortcuts, and they become unavailable, you're up a creek… I have a web-designer friend of mine that knows how to use Wordpress CSS very well. He can manipulate and research to problem solve. But I'd put dollars to donuts that if I asked him to write a CSS or any other program for that matter from scratch, he wouldn't have the foggiest.

I know this GitHub is geared toward helping students getting ideas up, running, and selling, so toward the latter, it's invaluable, and actually quite generous. I'm still an old fuddy-duddy, and think that it's best to understand how to build the mechanism before buying it off the shelf.

I can't be the only one that did that science experiment as a kid, looking at The Effect of Music on Seed Germination and Plant Growth. I had a control group, a classical music group, and a heavy metal group. Each group of music assigned plants was subjected to an hour of their music per day, and germination/sprouting rates and subsequent plant growth measured. The plants subjected to classical music germinated the quickest, and experienced a statistically relevant greater amount of growth by the end of the experiment period. Clearly, something is there in the response mechanism… Intelligent maybe? (…intelligent prefers classical over heavy metal? ;) )

If only there was a category for investment in the promotion of health awareness, and healthy lifestyle education.

Or, you can travel in our limousines, which will drop you at the front door, or instead, you may arrange for a cab, which may only drop you off at a designated cab dropping location, conveniently 3.2 miles away from our front door down at the bottom of the hill.

Are we going to treat WiFi according to airspace protocol? Can a company or operation claim ownership to a quasi-physically-contained airspace? Perhaps invoke claims of trespassing by other non-approved, non-financially viable, sources? If you're living/working/visiting under my roof, then my rules, my WiFI.

Noted.

I never said anything about them not giving money to students who need it. Not once. I simply stated what was told to me about athletics. There's a difference between financial aid, and academic scholarship. Recruiting for academic purposes occurs much more so in post-undergrad situations. Whether or not you want to believe that athletics play a role in admissions and awards is up to you.

This. Not outright. Not Ivy League, but I know Stanford does.

I agree that the AI component is important to understand. Essentially we're talking about putting everything on a computer system, and installing the same OS on every "machine." One of the problems that I foresee mirrors that of Microsoft, in terms of monopoly, as well as the ongoing debate between PC vs Mac usage. Inevitably, the shared OS maker will have the monopoly, though others may try to dethrone it, or there will be a battle between two to three different systems each competing for market share, and proving almost incompatible with one another… until some Hackers develop a patch.

I would disagree. I know a lot of "normal people," and most use their browser to google or search using their preferred engine or a particular website, as well as load links from emails, or visit websites on the go.

Personally, I'm not sure that using a particular company or product's app really saves me any time. Half the time, the app takes forever to load or is so non-properly story-boarded, that I resort to google anyway. Maybe I'm the outlier.

+1

I remember my mother speaking to some college admissions person at a semi-prestigious school in Pennsylvania, many years back when I was in the throws of applying. When speaking to some admissions confusion with respect to my high school, the guy said, "Well frankly, it's not called the Ivy League because of its academics." That's always stuck with me. Athletic scholarships? You betcha. Academic scholarships? What are those?

Heart attack, respiratory failure, and other organ failure to boot. Tthe math of determining these "average" lengths of addiction are also troubling. When accounting for individuals that may have been addicted for three years, but died at the end of those three years, are we factoring in 3 years as the length of addiction? Are we weighting it in some other way along a point scale? The very title of that statistic is troublesome too: the length of addiction - it is unclear as to whether the lengths being measured and averaged share the same initial and final endpoints: The length of time elapsed between having no drug problem and recovery? Or, having no drug problem and death? Or, as I suspect a combined average, which renders the statistic useless.

I find troublesome that the author of the article (renowned neuroscientist and addiction journalist as cited) suggests that addiction is akin to a habit. The behavior itself is certainly habit, but the addiction lies moreso in the etymology and function of the habit than the actual repetitive behavior. For some, the addiction is distraction, for some escape, for others a sense of identity, and so on and so forth. To prescribe "outgrowing the addiction" as a solution is awfully simplistic, almost suggesting that if an addict could only replace that habit with something else, then all would be hunky dory. Well, in theory, sure. Maybe we can start designing rehab centers like they used to do traffic school - Improv Traffic School, Comedy Traffic School, Bikers' Traffic School - maybe Knitters Rehab: "We'll help you put down that needle, and pick up this one!" or Foodies Rehab: "Stop smoking that joint, and learn to smoke these ribs!" The possibilities are endless. But not likely.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/may/11/terms-condition... The author cites from the above-linked study that 58% of adults surveyed in 2011 would rather read an instruction manual or credit card bill than online terms and conditions. (I wish that study had clarified whether they had surveyed an equal number of men and women.) That link amongst almost every you read regarding reading contracts and whatnot always advocate reading through word for word, and making sure you understand everything. Two things prohibit this - time and ease of comprehension. If companies could bullet point, we'd all be able to get through it within a reasonable amount of time. Those bullet points would hopefully simplify the language and make clear for those who cite "difficult to understand" as the reason for why they don't read through terms and conditions. I imagine some might need to contact legal counsel for explanations every time they want to sign up for internet, use a new application, or even browse a website. These fees would be quite costly, and it is arguable that the total damages associated with failure to reading terms and conditions would not outweigh the expenditure for ensuring clarity and comprehension through legal counsel. However, despite the theoretical advocacy for thorough reading, companies do not actually want us to do this. If they did, I believe they would make it easier. Lawyers like convoluting things; they like leaving loopholes, and making language just abstruse and ill-constructed enough to deter even the most erudite from fully reading anything they've written. (I sound like I hate lawyers, but I don't. I took the LSAT's thinking maybe I would like to go to law school to learn that school of thought. But I digress…)

The article about the Londoners is just sad all around. Are they to blame? Are the companies writing these wandering tomes of terms and conditions? Surely there has to be a better way to outlay and convey the constructs of these user agreements.

I would be curious to know how many of you use these, and which you find most useful. Some of these seem odd as the top 25. I can't imagine many that have missed Google Drive, Pinterest, Buffer or even Audible. Meetup wouldn't be my go-to, but maybe I should reconsider this. Wix is not the newest or greatest for simplistic website building, and many platforms offer comparable and equally if not more simplistic interfaces for design.

HelloSign is new to me. I hadn't heard of Fiverr either, more familiar with the more currently popular crowdsourcing sites. I've only recently discovered TalkWalker, so I'm still seeing how that fits into my social media plan.

At the risk of seeming like I'm just tearing down the author, I must admit that I'm hard-pressed to come up with a better list of "must-have" tools. I use Google Drive religiously, but not sure what I would tell someone else I couldn't live without...

Let's hope that the competition between Amazon and PayPal results in some significant value for the consumer/user/business users. Years ago, when I first built my e-commerce site, the only viable payment method that could be easily integrated was PayPal. Unless I wanted to pay a significant premium to have a payment gateway before I was ready to take on those initial sunk costs, PayPal was the most attractive and likely solution.

Hopefully, the industry will shift as more options become available and user-friendly. PayPal has the advantage of name recognition, but Amazon shares the same, and frankly, I personally regard Amazon more positively than PayPal. Hopefully, the industry continues its trend, now a quasi-oligopoly and eventually monopolistic competition.

Like others have mentioned, I too wonder how they are going to divvy shares.

I presented Conway's Game of Life in a classroom this summer of 10-12 year olds. They had no issue understanding it, were fascinated by the very simplicity of the concept that has immeasurable applications.

I would agree that most AP CS students come from a background of CS. It was certainly less common for students in my high school (a private college-prep school) to randomly pick up AP CS to look good on their transcripts. Most had already an interest and experience.

I think there are two types of CS students, which are quite often reflective of preferred learning styles and life schemas: those who are far more intuitive learners, and grow and retain knowledge through doing (experience and practice); and those who need the rules laid out, so that they may digest them, incorporate them into their operational styles, and then figure out how to use them, push them to their limits, and break them. Both of these types of students possess the ability to operate from a place of creativity, but some have yet to develop gut intuition, and feel safer and more confident starting from a place of concreteness, and from there, launching into a more nebulous space.

I applaud the author for innovating the CS (and AP CS) curricula and teaching methodology. I think that it may very well prove more functional and effective for many students.

As I see it, the natural extension of identifying this "secret to teaching," is to try and extrapolate it to "unlearning," or memory loss, dementia and Alzheimer's.

If we can mimic and model the neuronal pathways and firings within humans, using AI, then we should also be able to study the relationship between the failure and degradation of pathways. AI pathways are subject to break and fail as well, though the causes are of course different. However, it would be imagined that there must be some shared structural stresses that result in the "unlearning" and failure to fire or function.

The potential for AI is immeasurable. If we can teach a robot, surely we can stress its system enough to "unteach" it. Despite being unable to force-feed it junk-food and/or vitamins/minerals, we can replicate environmental stressors, and once having generated the "unlearning" process, examine how to halt the degradation and perhaps reverse the trajectory.

Simply not doing what one is specifically "tasked to do" does not necessarily represent procrastination. It may be not be a direct route to one's specific end; however, it's important to recognize that sometimes on the journey from side to side, one learns, finds, or imagines a new way to move forward. The internet simply provides new ways (which society moves to chastise and to ascribe blame) to wander off the beaten path. I find that when my internet clicking and surfing become as wayward as a three year old following a butterfly in flight, usually I come away having learned something unexpected or something I didn't know I wanted to know, in both cases, of value. Do I think people spend/waste a lot of time watching random fart contests and people acting the fool? Well sure. But, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The benefit of online "procrastination" in many cases is significant.

I agree that there are a great many number for whom "time crunch" and the pressure of an imminent deadline help to produce a superior outcome. For those that know themselves well enough, I agree absolutely simply set your own start time, and don't built yourself up over "procrastination." You're simply scheduling your own work.

However, there is also another subset of people that put off starting projects and work until the last minute, and don't function well under pressure. Many produce inferior work; some break down.

Ultimately, the key is self-awareness and self-acceptance. Identify what kind of person you are, in terms of work habits and conditions, and be completely honest with yourself. Then don't feel guilty or silly or whatever other negative attitude people want to attach for structuring your own production schedule according to your strengths and superior functioning.

Really? I think somehow the blandness of its site echoes its historical context - it seems like a website built at the inception of websites, just how I associate NASA and space exploration. To each his own.

Despite the arguments in past years that funding NASA and space programming is a waste of government and private dollars, sure to have nothing other than futile and novelty implications, I have always been in favor of it. There is something about it, as I see it, that represents possibility, limitless thinking, and optimism. If we scrap the funding, it seems to me a sort of surrender to cynicism, insularity, and mediocrity.

The issue of certification and grades is a big one. Especially in terms of functionality of skills and hire-ability. Grades are what I lovingly refer to as "third-party perspective" on your knowledge. I can tell you whatever I want, but a grade or a certification or a degree, that's some measure of corroboration of your own self-perception. I totally agree that it would be great to be measured upon past achievement, but to play devil's advocate, think about trying to get your first job. Every application asks about your experience. Well, in order to get experience, you need a job, and in order to get a job, you need experience. In a way, an education and a degree, particularly from a renowned university, is a form of advanced recommendation, and at the very least, scholastic experience. But to the point of being measured upon accomplishment, this is, naturally, heavily biased against the less experienced, who may have much to offer, but not have yet had the opportunity to display and demonstrate their potential.

Maybe there should be two tracks for the MOOC -- degree/certification/program based and the casual/intense/driven supplemental learner… the latter of which gets his or her material and supplementary exercises and resources in lump sum. The alternative, of course, is to do like you do with Netflix - wait for the entire season of [insert addictive show] to become available and commit 24 hours to watching the entire thing with minimal bathroom breaks and pausing to get a bowl of soup - wait until the course is almost over, then sign up, and you can go through everything all at once…

This narrative serves as direct refutation to the argument that our ever-expanding technology is making us exponentially increasingly disconnected and isolated. Leave it to Ingress to bring about random meet-ups, bringing together women with canes and religious men with yarmulkes, encouraging clothing-wearers to engage with nudists, and pre-teen craigslist entrepreneurs with failed slackrope walkers.

Is it a game I would want to engage in? Not really. I criticize several people I know that became addicted to the Kardashian app… Create a fake persona, and "do stuff" to gain popularity and virtual-Twitter followers? If you could only see how far my eyes roll back in my head, as I describe this. On the contrary, while capturing portals may not be how I want to spend my early morning hours (most notable because I prefer to sleep between 12 am and 4 am to get to the gym around 530-6 am), at least there is evidence that Ingress is connecting people in the flesh, around real, tangible, visible objects and locations. At least in its virtual combat, the terrain is real. Rather than an escape from reality to a contrived, imaginary realm, Ingress facilitates a renewed connection amongst its players, most notably between people that might not otherwise have been connected.

You are absolutely right about the invaluable experience of attending a university in person. However, there are less fortunate individuals that crave an education but can neither afford nor gain access to the university system. I am of course referring to both students inside and outside of the United States. There are absolutely elements that one cannot replicate online; however, given the choice between online education and none at all? Well, the choice seems painfully clear. I understand that you were not suggesting that online education is futile, and simply advocating the benefits of attending university on campus. I believe that it's important not just to look at where the two experiences are dissimilar, and the disadvantages of MOOC, but rather to also recognize the advantages MOOC offers to many, as the alternative to no education at all.

I would posit that there are two categories of MOOC students: those that seek out classrooms to learn focused knowledge; and those that find the online education style appealing.

The former category, I believe, is far more driven. These students are self-motivated, with a drive/need to learn and digest the information quickly and/or in their own timeframe (the "binge learners," similar to the binge watchers of entire seasons of television shows on Netflix).

The second category of MOOC students is more nebulous to me. Without specific intent and purpose, but enthralled by the potential to take courses and/or get course credit online, their urge to engage is simply less.

You, joshontheweb, clearly are of the first category, as am I, and I can sympathize with the irritation and frustration of waiting for material to appear.

The greater issues, as I see them, regarding MOOC and a free university education online, are that of measurement, breadth, and accountability. Taking courses online is akin to having a class where all the exams and benchmarks are "take-homes." We have no way to measure what is actually being learned, consumed, digested, encoded vs what is simply being spit back from a book or other source. What's more, when something is free, somehow people often don't value it in quite the same way. Ask someone to pay $5 for a class, and even that may motivate a different participation and engagement level. Kind of like buying a series of workout sessions with a personal trainer - you're far more likely to show up to the gym.

In regards to the breadth issue, universities make you take courses across a number of subjects and categories in order to make sure you have some basic foundational coursework under your belt. We may not have all enjoyed all of these categorically required classes, and if nothing else, a few left me with some fodder for dinner party conversation. The online university education system, in order to be truly beneficial, functional, and comparable for degree programs, will have to lay out some common minimum and breadth requirements, that may provide a replicable experience for students truly interested in pursuing an advanced degree. Of course, this really doesn't apply to those interested merely in enrichment and in-depth instruction on specific topics rather than a degree program. For these students, the availability of knowledge and practical implementation exercises is all that matters.

Finally, I see an issue with accountability, as in the difficulty with provided online students with enough structure and deadline as to promote a sense of onus and accountability. As noted earlier, this also ties in directly with the issue of not paying for coursework. Some might argue that releasing information weekly provides students with a benchmark of when and where they should be learning material; however, arguably, releasing the material from the get-go, and establishing an end-date for the course, by which time students must complete all graded coursework, would also suffice. I can't quite put my finger on it yet, but somewhere the measure of accountability within this space falls short. There is a nebulous void between the sources and recipients of knowledge and education online. Maybe it's the lack of true interaction, maybe it's the lack of classroom (the engagement of a finite group of students, seated next to each other, forced to endure the annoying drone of the heavy breather sitting next to you, the random but startling crackling of the lecturer's microphone, the timely malfunction of the overhead projector, the ripe and palpable angst during an exam…), or maybe it's just not education as I know, or knew, it, which doesn't mean a darn thing.

Having been in educational settings, both one-on-one and classroom, I fear I am quick to think of the students for whom this type of educational forum would be useless. Those students who look for the shortcuts, and simply want the accolades and recognition for having done something, with little impetus to do the work. Instead, as I write this, I think about the students for whom MOOC will truly be revolutionary and life-altering. For those students, who could not afford nor gain access to higher education, but who would do anything for it, then I imagine and hope that it would be for them that we would not have to worry about precise measurement and accountability. Instead, they will hopefully relish the opportunity to learn, breadth and all, striving to turn the opportunity into reality, recharting the courses of their futures, and approaching MOOC with gratitude and integrity.