When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
For two years students in West Palm Beach, Florida have participated in a project to create a nine-hole mini golf course.
The course, a collaboration between the math and visual arts departments, is entirely student designed and built, with some chaperoning by teachers. While this may seem like a great opportunity for students to express creativity, one of the designs allowed by the school is raising eyebrows.
The questionable design from students at Oxbridge Academy, a private high school founded in 2011 by billionaire business man Bill Koch, was a communism-themed hole which included cut out images of Karl Max and Vladimir Lenin accompanied by the hammer and sickle, the popular Communist revolutionary symbol later adopted by the USSR. This design was approved by the school and among those on the course opened for use.
This is another example of how students are becoming increasingly unaware about communism and the history behind the ideology. According to the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation annual report on U.S. attitudes towards socialism, millennials have very little education on communism.
Some interesting findings from that report include: Millennials are the least unfavorable to communism, seven in ten millennials along with Americans as a whole either don’t know the definition of communism or misidentify it, millennials opt for socialism over capitalism when asked which type of country they preferred, and seven out of ten underestimate the number of people killed under communism. Communism is responsible for approximately 100 Million deaths since the 20th century compared to 25 million killed by Nazism, which was another form of socialism itself.
While both ideologies are equally repugnant, the two are not perceived as such both by students and school administrators, despite being ideological cousins.
While it goes without saying no educator or school would approve a design including swastikas and cutouts of Adolf Hitler, the same is apparently not true about communist-themed designs, despite being responsible for nearly four times as many deaths.
A local CBS affiliate reporting on the school project showed footage of the communist course multiple times but awkwardly didn’t comment.
Oxbridge Academy declined to comment on the design, or what information their students are being taught about communism.
winning comment: If they're going to have an accurate communist theme, everyone should have to wait in line to play with the one golfball, and get the same score at the end.
Stanford Professor: Dungeons and Dragons Perpetuates Systems of White, Male Privilege
by TOM CICCOTTA 17 Apr 2018
A professor of education at Stanford University argues in a recent academic journal article that the tabletop game Dungeons & Dragons perpetuates white privilege.
Standford University Professor Antero Garcia argues in an academic journal article that the popular game Dungeons and Dragons perpetuates systems of privilege.
Focusing on how the tabletop role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons is built on a system of play that has grown and shifted over the course of 40 years, this study emphasizes the central role that systems play in mediating the experiences of participants. By focusing on depictions of gender, race, and power in Dungeons & Dragons — as a singular cultural practice — this study highlights how researchers must attend to cultural production both around and within systems.
Garcia argues that Dungeons and Dragons encourages a distrust of the “other.” It’s a weird focus for a Stanford scholar, especially since Garcia concedes that race in Dungeons & Dragons is not much like race in the real world. In the game, the characters are divided by their species. Some characters are elves, some are dwarves, and some are halfings, according to Garcia.
Professor Garcia doesn’t stop there. He bemoans the fact that Dungeons & Dragons began as a “white man’s” hobby. He argues that wargaming communities are “male-dominated,” even though the inventor of Dungeons & Dragons tested the tabletop game out by letting his daughter play.
Garcia’s 16-page article focuses on the representation of women in the game. According to Garica’s research, by 2014, more than half of the game’s depicted characters are female.
According to the article, Garcia’s ultimate wish is to see Dungeons & Dragons move beyond its problematic past into a more diverse and inclusive future.
So, yeah. Dungeons and Dragons is a tool of the oppressive patriarchy. I wish I'd known what awesome power I wielded when I was 14. I mean, who doesn't associate a basement full of nerds with the ruling elite?
this is a generation wuss move, therefore this thread:
headline: DEMOCRATIC PARTY FILES LAWSUIT ALLEGING RUSSIA, TRUMP CAMPAIGN, AND WIKILEAKS CONSPIRED TO TILT 2016 ELECTION TOWARD TRUMP
by Kevin Ryan
The Democratic National Committee filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit Friday against the Russian government, the Trump campaign, and the WikiLeaks organization alleging a far-reaching conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 campaign and tilt the election to Donald Trump.
...
The complaint alleges that Trump campaign officials conspired with the Russian government to the hack Democratic Party computer networks and leak the stolen information, thereby hurting Hillary Clinton’s campaign and helping Donald Trump win the election.
DNC Chairman Tom Perez has released a statement saying, in part, “During the 2016 presidential campaign, Russia launched an all-out assault on our democracy, and it found a willing and active partner in Donald Trump’s campaign. This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency.”
According to the Washington Post, “The case asserts that the Russian hacking campaign — combined with Trump associates’ contacts with Russia and the campaign’s public cheerleading of the hacks — amounted to an illegal conspiracy to interfere in the election that caused serious damage to the Democratic Party,” and that “The [Democratic] party said the Trump defendants committed conspiracy through their interaction with Russian agents and their public encouragement of the hacking, with the campaign itself acting as a racketeering enterprise promoting illegal activity.”
President Trump in not named as a defendant, but Trump aides who met with Russians during the campaign are, including Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Rick Gates. The lawsuit also names as a defendant the Russian military intelligence agency accused of engineering the hacks, WikiLeaks, which published the stolen emails, WikiLeak’s founder Julian Assange, and Trump associate Roger Stone.
My experience has been similar in this, having also managed engineers in a software development role both from US colleges and abroad.
In general, if give a Chinese or Indian software engineer a very comprehensive and well-designed specification (including precise details about stuff like the UI that we sometimes tend not to think too much about), they will crank out a piece of working code which conforms precisely to the specification and functions exactly as designed; no more, no less.
By comparison, if the specification for the project is ambiguous, or in a state of constant change, you will wind up with a bloated and barely-functional mess.
Graduates of US universities, by comparison, seem much better at dealing with ambiguity and change. They learn in school how to make educated guesses, how to resolve contradictions, and are just generally better at problem-solving and thinking on their feet.
You should try and work with engineers from South-East Asia.
In South-East Asia it's not polite to say "No" and rather than saying that they don't understand, all you get is a smiling, nodding face so when you walk away you still have no idea whether they understood or not - 2 weeks later (if you're lucky) you find out they didn't.
Aussies will just tell you outright that they don't understand or need more information - they need it to actually do the job.
Engineers from Sweden can be frustrating too because they're very respectful, almost too worried about upsetting anyone.
In Australia, software engineers are very blunt in code reviews, freely commenting on bad code or how to improve it - I've always found this educational and learned more from code reviews than what I learned in University.
In Sweden, at a code review, you'd get vague verbal comments such as "I think this needs more work" but nothing specific, they'd dance endlessly about what they were wanting to say but not actually say it - this was really annoying to me since the Swedes I worked with were very good engineers and I almost had to strangle them to get them to tell me what they were thinking. After about 6 months of this, most realised that they could tell me what they were thinking and it worked MUCH better.
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
And my experience mirrors yours. Female engineers do seem to make better engineering managers than males. In terms of both big-picture organizational skills (the ability to juggle a hundred ideas at once) as well as small-scale interpersonal skills, I agree that the women who I have worked alongside in this role seem far more effective, and for more confident, than myself and my male colleagues at this task. Here at WGN, I work with a lady by the name of Cathy, a very grandmotherly type, who is in charge of the whole operations department. (The folks who use the stuff that my team builds to actually make TV.) We were talking about this yesterday- she doesn't even know how big her staff is (it's well over a hundred people), but her department runs like a Swiss watch. It's one of the things that I just always assume will be ok.
My view of female software engineers:
When I first started work in the US, I took the blunt approach to a code review and the lady ended up bawling.
I'd never felt like such an ****-hole at work, it wasn't my intent, all I'd done was pointed out errors and how to improve the code.
These days I tailor these comments to the personality of the female engineer, some need to be thoroughly assured that I'm not simply saying that they're incompetent and that the comments are genuine improvements.
The common traits amongst the best female engineers/managers I've worked with are that they're very practical, intelligent and NOT emotional; most of these would genuinely be offended if asked to attend a "Women in the workforce" conference because know that they can stand toe-to-toe with a male counterpart and know that they're respected.
I've only asked to switch software teams twice in my career and both were away from female managers with mood swings, it's something I just can't deal with.
With guys, you can get into heated engineering arguments but eventually one usually realises that the other is right, has the better solution, or that they simply need to move forward with one of their ideas, and they move on, no harm done and possibly some respect earned.
Upset most female co-workers like that and you end up with a bitter life-long enemy that you certainly don't want writing your performance appraisal.
Males don't even need to like each personally to work well together as long as they respect each other professionally - they simply focus on the job.
Getting two females who don't like each other to work together is never productive.
Lots and lots of cultural and sex difference observations.
People often criticize the "LOUD American." But we don't hold a candle to the Aussies, and there are a lot of subcultures and regional differences in the USA.
I'm widely reputed to be blunt, straightforward and truthful. But even I was taken aback by some of the bluntness I saw working with Aussies. Bravo is all I can say.
A professor in California this week shamelessly took shots at the recently deceased First Lady, Barbara Bush.
Randa Jarrar, an English professor at California State University, Fresno, referred to the matriarch of the Bush family as an “amazing racist,” and said she was “happy the witch is dead” before gloating that her tenure would protect her from being disciplined.
“Barbara Bush was a generous and smart and amazing racist who, along with her husband, raised a war criminal. **** outta here with your nice words,” Jarrar said, just an hour after the former first lady’s death on Tuesday at 92.
Jarrar then made her Twitter private and posted she was “currently on leave from Fresno State.”
The teacher’s tasteless tweets generated a huge Internet backlash before her account was locked.
“PSA: either you are against these pieces of **** and their genocidal ways or you’re part of the problem. That’s actually how simple this is. I’m happy the witch is dead. Can’t wait for the rest of her family to fall to their demise the way 1.5 million Iraqis have,” the self-described Muslim professor tweeted, also mentioning she was glad “George W. Bush is probably really sad right now.”
The tirade continued with the college level educator showboating her tenure, which shields many professors from being fired no matter how inappropriate their behavior might be.
“I work as a tenured professor. I make 100K a year doing that. I will never be fired. I will always have people wanting to hear what I have to say,” she crowed on Twitter.
In a short time Jarrar’s shocking Tweets garnered over 2,000 outraged replies, as reported in the college paper, The Fresno Bee.
“@FresnoStateAlum wow. Not making me feel proud of being an alum right now. I think more than a ‘statement’ is needed from you on this @JosephICastro,” tweeted former student Lauren Milam, while tagging Fresno State president Joseph Castro.
“I have always had great respect for Fresno State, but if @randajarrar and the institution value hate speech through the mockery and celebration of Americans dying, I refuse to associate. Not another penny from me. @JosephICastro and @Fresno_State ought to be ashamed,” pointed out another user.
The outrage left Jarrar hurling blame and seeking sympathy saying:
“If you’d like to know what it’s like to be an Arab American Muslim American woman with some clout online expressing an opinion, look at the racists going crazy in my mentions right now.”
Things were escalated even further when Jarrar posted a phone number which people assumed belonged to the school or herself, but turned out to be a line to a crisis and suicide prevention center, prompting a deeper distain for her tastelessness.
“Replying to @randajarrar. Your freedom of speech does not entitle you to have all these people spam an actual mental health crisis line. Please stop,” a user claiming to be a pediatric surgeon tweeted.
Her book on Amazon began taking on bad review after bad review with comments like “Terrible book,” “Horrible writing. Don’t waste your time,” and “Will make for expensive toilet paper.”
Fresno State put out a statement telling the public they had “deep concerns” regarding their tenured professor.
teach by the sword, kill your students by the car:
An 11-year-old boy from Parkland Middle School in El Paso, Texas was hit by a car and killed during the National Student Walkout to protest gun violence on Friday.
Jonathan Benko sustained fatal injuries after being struck by a vehicle on Loop 375. Police said Benko was among a group of students who left the designated walkout area during the walkout that marked 19 years since the Columbine shooting.
I keep hearing people asking for "Reasonable gun control." I have yet to hear a succinct description, or a specific example, of what "reasonable gun control" is.
Can anyone provide me with such an example? I'm extremely curious to understand exactly what it is that these kids are asking for.
I kind of feel like, if you are petitioning congress to create laws, you should be able to reasonably articulate what specific thing(s) you are asking for.
it's one of those terms like "the common good" or "your fair share"
"Common Good" is at least a recognized legal principle, about which much has been written. It has evolved from a combination of western philosophic thought and the General Welfare clause of the constitution. Example: https://ir.stthomas.edu/cgi/viewcont...&context=ustlj
Fair Share is trickier. It's a valid concept in arenas such as contracts and family law, where rules as to the disbursement of valuable property is concerned. I'm not aware of hearing the term used (in a legal sense) with regard to entitlement or social-welfare programs.
"Common sense" is interesting, as it would seem to invoke the "reasonable person" doctrine in common law, and yet the concept is absent from legislation and precedent in the US so far a I can tell. Thus, I feel its reasonable to require that an individual citing "common sense" to provide examples. I mean, what would "common sense marriage laws" consist of? Is it common sense that anyone can marry anyone else, or that miscegenation and homosexual relationships are undesirable and should be prohibited? Depends on who you ask.
I keep hearing people asking for "Reasonable gun control." I have yet to hear a succinct description, or a specific example, of what "reasonable gun control" is.
Can anyone provide me with such an example? I'm extremely curious to understand exactly what it is that these kids are asking for.
The examples I usually see:
1. No military-style weapons
2. No high-capacity magazines
3. Mandatory training/background checks for purchases
4. Elimination of private sales (ie, FFL-only)
5. Limits on amount of firearms or amount of ammunition owned by an individual (ie, no "arsenals')
Most of these things make apparent that the problem isn't the lack of ideas from the left, but rather that they are only "common sense" to those who are unwilling to look very frankly at the nature of violent crime, and the incredibly negligible effect most of these would have on the overall violent crime and homicide rates.
I can't be bothered to engage in these debates on Facebook/Twitter/Wherever anymore, but I did watch one guy simultaneously argue with 2 anti-gunners. Anti-gunner A was arguing that the 5.56 NATO round should be banned because of the "horrific injuries" it creates in the human body, while Anti-gunner B was arguing that AR rifles should be banned because 5.56 NATO was ineffective as a hunting round for anything larger than varmints.
04-18-2018, 02:28 PM
The questionable design from students at Oxbridge Academy, a private high school founded in 2011 by billionaire business man Bill Koch, was a communism-themed hole which included cut out images of Karl Max and Vladimir Lenin accompanied by the hammer and sickle, the popular Communist revolutionary symbol later adopted by the USSR. This design was approved by the school and among those on the course opened for use.
and school administrators, despite being ideological cousins.
0
