Pretty Heady Claim that Matter will be Created from Light within the Year
Exploring How We Filterpret the World through Our Perceptions of Reality
Here is an interesting take on the 3 decade long exponential increase in University tuition in the US. I think the author is on to something, unfortunately, I also think it’s not so clear-cut. In the last few years, the amount state governments put toward their University systems has definitely exacerbated the problem. Additionally, many students don’t think of University as a must to be counted in the haves. They view it as their own option to potentially avoid being in the have notes. Nor does the article take into account the never ending drive to build new buildings and enlarge endowment.
A coupe of key quotes from the article to make you think.
“Everyone in the age of inequality knows that the purpose of a college education isn’t to benefit the nation; it’s to give the private individual a shot at achieving a High Net Worth.”
“Agreeing upon that, everyone from state legislators to the Secretary of Education naturally began to ask, Why should I pay for someone else to get rich? Those people need to foot the bill themselves.”
“Werth quoted an administrator from Lehigh University who put the new philosophy succinctly: “If it’s going to be a world of haves and have-nots, we sure intend to be among the haves.”
Forgot to post this lat week!
The recent news that Google and Amazon are vasty white and male should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention. I though this news combined with a few other articles would be worth a look.
Arthur Chu does a great job of looking at why nerds/geeks need to stop thinking they can “win” women or that someone women are owed to them if they are successful.
This piece about the type of men drawn to Seattle by Amazon (and also originally San Fran) is also worth a look.
Over the last few weeks we have witnessed a great example of the 2014 version “it’s my way or the highway” mentality being played out in the US. A “smart” gun that recognizes the owner via RF signal from a watch is being actively opposed by the NRA and most gun advocates. Even worse a gun store owner (an advocate of the 2nd amendment himself) stopped plans to sell the smart gun because of threats to his business and life. When did we become the country where it is acceptable and normal discourse to threaten people with ideas different from our own?
While the technology is not perfect, and can still lead to your gun being stolen (if the watch is also stolen), it is simply a technological advancement, NOT an attack on the 2nd amendment. If the NRA and gun proponents truly believe in the Constitution, the health of our democracy and the free market, then this should not be an issue. The Daily Show has a great send up of this here. While this article in the Economist is a little over the top with emotional resonance, it also clearly touches on this problem.
I have a debate with many a colleague and friend who share different ideas than I do on gun laws. The debate centers around what is the line between protecting the 2nd amendment vs. simply opposing change because it’s scary. Yet we never threaten each other! In the case of this smart gun, I am afraid it is about even more than the 2nd amendment debate. It’s about the unwillingness to respect another opinion than your own. A place where logic and mutual respect leave and are replaced by fear and anger. If we can all agree we love the US, believe in the value of the Constitution, and want to see both survive there is no place for violent threats and hard line my way or the highway stances FROM EITHER SIDE of any debate.
Lauren Davis at i09 has given one of the best explanations of why we should care about the costumes female super heroes are drawn wearing.