I ran across a video on YouTube the other day promoting a website called http://www.shutdownday.org/, and I gotta tell you, it's the best idea I've heard in a while. Shut Down Day, March 24th, is an internationally observed day for everyone to turn off their computers. No internet, no computer games, no instant messenger for 24 hours. The site has a forum, blog, and a few videos on YouTube that talk about it.
Here's a good one:
Just make sure the laptop is broken before you play ice hockey with it.
Here's another video that someone made:
But there are some that don't so much agree with this idea. And if you read on their website some things people will do instead, some say they will be playing video games that day... not exactly taking advantage of the opportunity for extroversion. As someone who logs on to myspace everyday and HAS to check her email, it will be a challenge. But, I think it's an excellent idea, and I hope people do decide to shut down.
It's sad how dependent we are on technology... I'm a filthy hypocrite, seeing as I like my electric blanket at night and spend most of my time staring at the computer screen. But I do acknowledge that too much is not really a good thing.
On a related note, we are studying the Industrial Revolution in my World History class. Where our society could once survive without technology, now we are totally dependent. Where will we be in twenty years?
Friday, March 9, 2007
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Egypt jails dissident blogger for four years
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, here is a sad day for the freedom of expression indeed.
A court in the Mediterranean coastal city of Alexandria sentenced Abdel Karim Suleiman to three years for insulting Islam and to one year for defaming the president.
An Egyptian blogger was sentenced to four years in jail on Thursday for insulting Islam and defaming President Hosni Mubarak, triggering condemnation from international human rights groups.
A court in the Mediterranean coastal city of Alexandria sentenced Abdel Karim Suleiman to three years for insulting Islam and to one year for defaming the president.
This was the first time a blogger has been sentenced in Egypt for writings published on the Internet.
I don't like it. Wasn't it Voltaire that said all that about defending your right to say what you will to the death, even if he doesn't like it?
Yeah, yeah. The so-called "American Way" doesn't fly with everyone. Although the principle makes sense and people should be allowed free speech, no matter what they say, some people are still offended.
Doesn't make sense to me. Of course it wouldn't, in my cushioned, suburban, democratic/republic environment.
But it gives you a strange sense that we can say anything we want online, and nobody is going to come after our blood. How many videos do you see making fun of Bush, Kerry, Cheney, John Edwards, the Clintons, etc.? Youtube itself is a bastion of evil for freethinkers everywhere. Look at JibJab.com. Look at the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert. Any pundit on any network, be it Fox, CNN, or any others.
We have such freedom here. I hear people make noise about how we are so suppressed, oh my goodness. Perhaps we are. Some politicians certainly do things during their terms to fit their own personal agendas rather than the general public, two examples being the Patriot Act, or the things that the NSA do which include wiretapping and surveillance. But I think that there are a lot of things being taken for granted, as well.
The fact that I can even talk about this issue in a public forum is a fantastic freedom.
You have to appreciate what you have. But that's not all I'm saying. Vigilance is key in a society like ours. There are boundaries being set down, and lines being crossed. You have to know what freedoms you have, and hold onto them. When it comes down to it, it's the most important thing you can do.
Now that I'm done babbling...
Discuss.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Circumstantial Boxes Part 1/?
I am so serious on trying to write a book about how judgmental the Christian church is and how many of its rules are circumstantial.
I know, lots of controversy, and people will threaten me if I were to actually get something like that published (albeit, unlikely).
Like "If a man lies with a another man..." Blah blah passage from Leviticus.
Many passages from Leviticus are circumstantial, like their insane amount of rules toward random things... such as shrimp or pork (kosher).
You didn't eat shrimp or pork back then because it was teeming with disease!
Much the same: Back then population was still sorta on the low side. If people started becoming gay, or released they were gay, population numbers would go down. It was much easier to increase population if people were closeted about their gayness... and just had children anyway... or became celibate priests... (Cough, sorry about that last bit catholics, low blow).
But seriously, if you plan on waving around one rule mentioned... oh.... 4 or 5 times in the whole book, why not follow the rest of them!? Why you say? Because they're ridiculous? (DUH)
Gayness is also not mentioned in the ten commandments. I do not see any "Thou shalt participate in activities of gayness" (like interior design) in the 10 commandments. DO you?
Also, did Jesus ever speak of gayness? NO!
Paul mentioned it once in a letter.
But there's no documented case of Jesus mentioning it. And for god's sake! He hung out with prostitutes.
Jesus was a pretty rad dude actually.
If I lived back then, I'd want to hang out with Jesus.
He may have been a pacifist but hell, did anyone see 'Jesus Christ Superstar'? He really did knock over all those tables.
And he was completely awesome about it.
TO sum things up and on a final note:
Gayness is a sin - Circumstantial
Jesus - Fucking Rocked.
I hope to do a more thorough post ont his later, but at the moment, I am so very tired and not up for research, I just wanted to get my point out there.
And this is more evidence on how sparatic my brain is. Oy.
Anyways:
9/11 Controversy
I found this site a while ago; this documentary has the most compelling evidence about what really happened on 9/11 I've ever seen. If I were you, I wouldn't take it at face value necessarily, but a lot of the information, especially about the Pentagon and Flight 93, is way more believable than any shit that officials tell us.
Just watch it with an open mind. It's about an hour and a half long, so check it out when you have time to see it in one fell swoop. Or one swell foop.
www.loosechange911.com
Just watch it with an open mind. It's about an hour and a half long, so check it out when you have time to see it in one fell swoop. Or one swell foop.
www.loosechange911.com
Thursday, February 8, 2007
A Failing Grade
Ah, mathematics. The bread and butter of logical thinkers everywhere. Personally, the subject is not really my cup of tea. I understand the importance and am willing to do the work required at school, but there are things I'd really rather do than sit in my geometry class and listen to my teacher drone on about proofs and proportions and this theorem and that theorem. That's why I didn't think I would be arguing for more study and more focus on the subject in schools.
Today in geometry, my teacher brought up something that may become effective for my class. It may be a school-wide decision, she didn't make it quite clear. Anyway, she said she had been talking about it with another teacher that uses the method, and was considering using it herself. The idea is this: instead of having quizzes be worth 25% of your grade and them acting like a short test, they would be treated more like a regular assignment. A student would take a quiz, and hand them in. Then, the teacher would pass them back and the student would see what problems they missed, and work with a partner or the teacher on the missed problems. Finally, once the paper was corrected, it would be turned in for credit. The value of a quiz, however, would be dropped to approximately 10-15% of your grade, and the test percentage would go up. I think in my class my teacher splits the percentages up like this right now: quizzes are worth 25%, regular assignments 25%, and tests 50%. Pretty standard. The new system would be like this: quizzes 10-15%, regular assignments 25%, and tests 60-65%.
I'll start with the pros of this choice, just to even out my argument a little. I think it is an excellent idea to be able to see what you did wrong on a problem. I have gotten tests and quizzes back from teachers in the past and not understood fully what I did wrong, and then not been able to go over it. It is extremely frustrating, especially when you end up making the same mistake again. Also, I think teachers encouraging students to work more with peers is great and totally beneficial. There should be a greater sense of unity with teenagers, although with our fickle natures unity is the hardest thing to manifest in a classroom.
Now, to the cons. Isn't this what homework is for? To do an assignment and practice the skills, then check over it the next day and work out the things that confused you? I don't know about other classes, but in my class my teacher asks every day if we had trouble with the homework. There are also ample opportunities to go to study club after school to get help. If we treat a quiz like an assignment, then what purpose do they really serve? Additionally, if we make tests worth 60-65%, then this system will not benefit the kids really. The average grade in my class at this point is a 71%. That's a C-. This means that a lot of the kids don't study, rarely complete homework, and don't do well on quizzes or tests. If one kid can copy off a smarter kid to correct their quiz, then they aren't learning anything. Therefore, they will be even more lax with their habits and get a bad grade on the test at the end of the chapter. If you don't make it important to do the work and do well on quizzes, there won't be very much motivation to get a good grade.
A possible reason for making this system is a benefit for the teacher; an attempt to raise the average grade, to make the teacher not look bad. A rather selfish reason, but if I end up being wrong and it raises the average, then more power to her. I don't agree with the method because it won't prepare students for the rigors of college and is coddling teenagers into not figuring things out for themselves, but what do I know. I am a teenager. But I am a teenager who knows what it's like to fail classes, and to pass classes. I understand that not all teaching methods work for all students, but I don't think that this is a good method. If there isn't good enough motivation with the right amount of positive enforcement, it's harder to learn. But if there is too much sensitivity and hand holding, it won't work either.
It seems like a big issue in schools in Washington is that kids aren't doing well in math. I think that it is extremely important that we raise standards, not lower them, like some politicians are saying we should do for the WASL. It's not only for the WASL, however; it's happening in our schools during the everyday. People in my class cheered at the thought of a less ominous quiz grade, and everyone booed me when I said that it was detrimental, but I'm in school to get ahead. We have the chance to broaden our minds and learn everything we can for free now, before we are adults and money dominates our lifestyles. And the teachers would coddle us, force us to crawl when we should be running? What is the sense in that? It's more important to get out of school what we can and learn how to eventually work out problems on our own than be led by the hand all the time. As young adults, it is imperative that this skill become a part of us.
Enough with the smiles and hand holding. We need discipline back in schools, or all we'll ever get is a failing grade and a returned application, with a "Thanks, but no thanks" apology written in bold red ink at the top.
Today in geometry, my teacher brought up something that may become effective for my class. It may be a school-wide decision, she didn't make it quite clear. Anyway, she said she had been talking about it with another teacher that uses the method, and was considering using it herself. The idea is this: instead of having quizzes be worth 25% of your grade and them acting like a short test, they would be treated more like a regular assignment. A student would take a quiz, and hand them in. Then, the teacher would pass them back and the student would see what problems they missed, and work with a partner or the teacher on the missed problems. Finally, once the paper was corrected, it would be turned in for credit. The value of a quiz, however, would be dropped to approximately 10-15% of your grade, and the test percentage would go up. I think in my class my teacher splits the percentages up like this right now: quizzes are worth 25%, regular assignments 25%, and tests 50%. Pretty standard. The new system would be like this: quizzes 10-15%, regular assignments 25%, and tests 60-65%.
I'll start with the pros of this choice, just to even out my argument a little. I think it is an excellent idea to be able to see what you did wrong on a problem. I have gotten tests and quizzes back from teachers in the past and not understood fully what I did wrong, and then not been able to go over it. It is extremely frustrating, especially when you end up making the same mistake again. Also, I think teachers encouraging students to work more with peers is great and totally beneficial. There should be a greater sense of unity with teenagers, although with our fickle natures unity is the hardest thing to manifest in a classroom.
Now, to the cons. Isn't this what homework is for? To do an assignment and practice the skills, then check over it the next day and work out the things that confused you? I don't know about other classes, but in my class my teacher asks every day if we had trouble with the homework. There are also ample opportunities to go to study club after school to get help. If we treat a quiz like an assignment, then what purpose do they really serve? Additionally, if we make tests worth 60-65%, then this system will not benefit the kids really. The average grade in my class at this point is a 71%. That's a C-. This means that a lot of the kids don't study, rarely complete homework, and don't do well on quizzes or tests. If one kid can copy off a smarter kid to correct their quiz, then they aren't learning anything. Therefore, they will be even more lax with their habits and get a bad grade on the test at the end of the chapter. If you don't make it important to do the work and do well on quizzes, there won't be very much motivation to get a good grade.
A possible reason for making this system is a benefit for the teacher; an attempt to raise the average grade, to make the teacher not look bad. A rather selfish reason, but if I end up being wrong and it raises the average, then more power to her. I don't agree with the method because it won't prepare students for the rigors of college and is coddling teenagers into not figuring things out for themselves, but what do I know. I am a teenager. But I am a teenager who knows what it's like to fail classes, and to pass classes. I understand that not all teaching methods work for all students, but I don't think that this is a good method. If there isn't good enough motivation with the right amount of positive enforcement, it's harder to learn. But if there is too much sensitivity and hand holding, it won't work either.
It seems like a big issue in schools in Washington is that kids aren't doing well in math. I think that it is extremely important that we raise standards, not lower them, like some politicians are saying we should do for the WASL. It's not only for the WASL, however; it's happening in our schools during the everyday. People in my class cheered at the thought of a less ominous quiz grade, and everyone booed me when I said that it was detrimental, but I'm in school to get ahead. We have the chance to broaden our minds and learn everything we can for free now, before we are adults and money dominates our lifestyles. And the teachers would coddle us, force us to crawl when we should be running? What is the sense in that? It's more important to get out of school what we can and learn how to eventually work out problems on our own than be led by the hand all the time. As young adults, it is imperative that this skill become a part of us.
Enough with the smiles and hand holding. We need discipline back in schools, or all we'll ever get is a failing grade and a returned application, with a "Thanks, but no thanks" apology written in bold red ink at the top.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)