Me neither. But it’s very much in keeping with other seriously-intended suggestions I’ve heard. Optimism is fine until it becomes just dreaming and wishing out loud.
There are betrayals so severe that a grindingly slow due process is actually itself an addition betrayal. Not arguing for a kangaroo court, but tenure should not be a defense for blatant cheating.
> Aristotle, Leibniz, Einstein or whatever brilliant person you can think of didn't become who they are using cue-cards.
You aren’t Einstein, I presume. Neither am I. So first of all, you can’t say that with any certainty.
But more importantly, the vanishingly small top end of the bell curve does not hold useful lessons for the rest of us. Things that mere mortals have to expend effort on are not even a second thought for them, so they have nothing to teach someone who is working to learn things they never even tried to learn.
This is why great coaches are usually middling athletes. This is why great teachers are rarely great in the field they teach. This is why lessons from those who are great are often frustrating and filled with statements like “just…you know…do X.”
> Our broad list of demands includes, but is not limited to: Climate action. Universal healthcare. Racial justice. Reproductive rights. LGBTQIA+ rights. Living wage / raise the minimum wage. Immigration reform. Education reform. Gun safety. Tax the rich. Affordable housing. Disability rights. Welfare and child support reform. Voters rights. Constitutional convention. Paid family and medical leave. Criminal justice system reform. Workers’ rights. Permanent ceasefire in Gaza.
> Specific demands will come from leaders and experts of existing fights for racial, economic, gender and environmental justice.
I don't want to disparage any of these specific demands, I agree with a lot (not all) of them, but put together they're so overly broad as to be a pipe dream. They might as well say they want to start a new political party that's slightly to the left of the Democrats.
The one thing that does stick out to me though is the Constitutional Convention. This is a bizarre ask, and it must be how they see their demands being passed into, not only law, but an amendment to the Constitution. The problem is calling a convention is so difficult† that their strike will last, essentially, forever. The last and only time we had a convention was in 1787.
"> Our broad list of demands includes, but is not limited to: Climate action. Universal healthcare. Racial justice. Reproductive rights. LGBTQIA+ rights. Living wage / raise the minimum wage. Immigration reform. Education reform. Gun safety. Tax the rich. Affordable housing. Disability rights. Welfare and child support reform. Voters rights. Constitutional convention. Paid family and medical leave. Criminal justice system reform. Workers’ rights. Permanent ceasefire in Gaza."
I’m not sure, but I thought their business model involved applying machine learning on user answers, like their translations of excerpts of written text / handwriting samples.
I think what I was recalling is the crowdsourcing translations mechanic, which is far more low tech:
> But wait – how could a beginner-level student translate advanced sentences? The solution that Duolingo employs uses the power of crowdsourcing, which involves many students offering their attempts at translating individual sentences. As each student submits a sentence, they can rate others’ translations, and the most highly rated translations “rise to the top.”
Over time, entire documents are translated and students gain many skill points for their language practice. It’s easy to see how the data collected from users could be useful to improve the algorithms that underly computer translation[…]
Duolingo has come a long way from those origins. It’s a gamified language learning app now, but with support of some languages reflecting that earlier crowd-sourced era. This video is a super interesting dive into the history and current state:
FWIW, I like Duolingo and think it is a healthy and productive use of gamification, but that does come at the cost of pure efficiency and comprehensive treatment of grammar. It’s best when paired with other tools.
Most people’s problem with learning a language is not speed, it’s the quit rate.
.png){kind=link}
reply