613 posts shown.
Carol Newman2 said:Disgruntled MAGA supporters are sending Joe Biden videos of themselves shredding his petition for signatures
http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a482987...a-potpise.html
------
Is there going to be anything left of the Republican Party once these internal elections are over?
Kyle Nelson3 said:Perhaps the title should be about a lack of basic decency, but here we are.
I don't know about you all, but hitting the theater isn't just a way for me to kill two hours when I'm bored.
I only go to AMC Theatres for specific films—the ones I actually think are worth paying premium prices to see on a big screen.
Sometimes I make a mistake, sometimes I don't, but that's a risk I'm willing to take.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting dead silence during a screening, but a little decorum wouldn't hurt. It seems like the issue is mostly with the younger crowd who act like they're just hanging out on their couch with friends.
They talk loudly, laugh, yell, and chat about random things, essentially disrupting the entire experience.
I almost went to see a movie in 4DX recently, and instead of being able to zone out and enjoy it, it was a disaster. Some teenager spent the whole movie narrating it like she was watching a football game. That’s just one example.
I'm not sure how everyone else feels, but it bothers me.
I try to tune it out, but it's difficult.
Am I being too demanding? Maybe times have changed, even if I'm not forty yet.
Or perhaps when a person finds the time and pays for a ticket, they have a right to expect at least a minimum level of respect and peace to enjoy the film.
What do you think?
I honestly don't know how people can even talk about this stuff without getting totally worked up! It’s just... I mean, maybe I'm being too much? But anyway! I was reading some things earlier—you know, just browsing—and it really got me thinking about how much everything changes depending on who you ask. I guess I just feel like we should be more chill about it all? Like, seriously! Everything feels so intense lately. I was chatting with Daniel Perez6 the other day, and even they were saying how wild things have become. It’s just crazy, right? Maybe it’s just me, though. I probably overthink everything. I definitely do! But still, there's just so much noise out there. I really wish we could just sit back, grab a coffee, and not worry about every little thing for once. Just a thought! Or a big thought? Who knows! kaže:
So, I was just thinking about Tara Westover... man, her story is just wild. She was only 17 when she finally stepped foot in a classroom for the very first time! Can you imagine? Before that, she was basically teaching herself everything there is to know about the world, aside from her brother helping her out with reading. It’s just incredible. Fast forward to today, and she’s in her early thirties with an actual PhD to her name. Talk about a massive journey, right? Just wow.
Look, I’m definitely not saying we should just ignore kids or anything like that—don't get me wrong! But, I guess it's pretty obvious that when you have adults who actually *want* to learn, they tend to get through their education way more effectively than kids who are just being forced to grind away just to get a piece of paper. It's just how it seems to me, maybe?
urbantinker8 said:bravo!👍
Well, I'd say absolutely not.🤷
I mean, personally, I don't really find myself losing sleep over those few hours I spent grinding through math problems back in the day. It isn't like I have any lingering trauma or insomnia because of it; I was never particularly obsessed with the subject, though I suppose I understood everything just fine and cruised through the curriculum without much trouble, I guess.
The fact that I did it while being totally miserable—and that I have zero use for any of it now—is probably my own issue to deal with.
But honestly, I'm not exactly crying about it either.
Anthony Ward6 said:That's true, and here's a little fun fact: in the US, you don't actually need a high school diploma to enroll in college or even go for a PhD. I was reading this article recently about a woman who has a PhD but dropped out of high school—she doesn't even have a GED. I guess that wouldn't be possible in America. 😬
Well, Kuki was only talking about math—so, I suppose a year is plenty of time for a graduate to master the core middle and high school math curriculum. Most of it is repetitive anyway since everything is interconnected; if someone spends four or five hours every single day on math, an average student could probably learn enough to get a decent C on an AP exam.
Besides, college expects you to master much more extensive material in a significantly shorter amount of time. 😁
...
I mean, honestly—when you're at a university in the States, they basically expect you to master a massive amount of material in way, way less time than you'd think. It’s kind of wild, really! 😁
I don't know, I guess I'm just really excited about this! Maybe it’s because the weather is finally turning around here, but I’ve been feeling so incredibly upbeat lately! It’s funny, isn't it? How much a little sunshine can change your whole mood? Anyway, I was just sitting here thinking about everything, and I honestly feel like things are just clicking into place! I mean, maybe I'm being a bit too optimistic, but I really think we're heading toward something great. Just an observation, I guess! kaže:
I mean, honestly? If someone can't wrap their head around it, they probably wouldn't make a great fit for a STEM-focused organization anyway. It’s just how it goes, I guess. And besides, most other people can pretty much pick up whatever math they actually need in just a few hours—or maybe a couple of dozen hours if they're dealing with something way above average. It shouldn't be that big of a deal!
Linda Price5 said:No, I am convinced that regardless of whether they were taught in fifth grade, seventh grade, or freshman year of high school, it remains a usable skillset. My reasoning is based simply on your own observation that there aren't any cognitive limitations at play here.
They grasped the basics of percentages, proportionality, and geometry.
And they can clearly navigate a coordinate system and various curves.
I believe those fundamentals have been mastered.
Personally, this looks like a pretty pathetic return on investment after spending 1,500 hours of one's life on a subject. It’s akin to studying math for eight hours a day for six months, only to walk away knowing how to plot the point (5, 1) on a graph or calculate basic proportions. Even Lana would achieve significantly more than this if she spent half a year applying herself alongside Klingor.
Hey there! I was just sitting here thinking about everything we discussed earlier, and honestly, I feel like I have so much more to say about it all! It’s funny how things work out sometimes, isn't it? I guess I might be overthinking this, but I just can't help myself. I really wanted to jump back in and share some thoughts because I've been buzzing about this all morning! Anyway, hope you guys are having an absolutely wonderful day! kaže:
Of course it can! I mean, carpenters have been around for thousands of years, right? But those massive high schools that everyone seems to flock to nowadays? Honestly, they’re kind of a relatively recent invention, if you think about it.
So, when you say "mastered" it... I mean, are we talking about like, actually passing a math midterm in maybe twenty minutes? Or are we talking about developing this whole lifelong habit of using math in your daily life? I guess it depends on how you look at it! Maybe both? Haha!
So, let’s do the math on this for a second. If a student spends, what, maybe two hours a week on math? So that’s like 2 hours times 54 weeks times 12 years of schooling. After all those twelve years of grinding away at math, what have they actually gained? I mean, they can tell you exactly how many gallons of Sherwin-Williams paint to buy to redo their apartment, or if the local grocer is trying to rip them off on the price of apples... but that's about it! Sure, they know the definition of a circle and how to solve a quadratic equation, but honestly, when was the last time a quadratic equation actually showed up in your daily life? Seriously, probably never!
They have an even bigger hatred for math now, more resistance whenever they try to grasp anything mathematical, and way less motivation to learn it than if they had never studied it at all.
And you think that's a net positive result? Wow, okay then.
How much school math do you actually use in daily life? BTW, how are you applying knowledge of logarithms, limits, or the volume of a pyramid?
Linda Price5 said:So, why is everyone forced into the exact same curriculum? It makes zero sense. Why should an aspiring mechanic or a carpenter be stuck reading classic literature or copying down essays just to avoid failing out of school? Why is anyone required to sit through a high-level calculus lecture when they have absolutely no intention of ever using it? If someone actually develops a genuine interest in a subject later in life, they can easily pick up a book, sign up for a specialized certification course, or simply hire a private tutor. The current system is fundamentally inefficient.Sometimes, you just have to stop overthinking, cut through the nonsense, and handle things with a certain level of blunt indifference. You deal with it, you move past it, and you don't look back.
Of course they could be done, but one has to ask: what exactly would be the motivation for doing them?
Even today, I find myself grinding through tasks that are utterly mindless and entirely beneath my interests. I do it simply because I know exactly what my hourly rate is for such drudgery. If I spend my afternoon disinterestedly scanning through some dusty old Hemingway manuscript or performing the soul-crushing task of balancing accounts deep into the red, I’m not getting paid a dime. Money only flows when the clock is running on billable work.
If we are still seeing the fallout in the form of a general decline in reading habits, a growing disdain for the literary classics, or a widespread allergy to mathematics, then the bottom line is clear: the net result is a failure.
I recall an instance during a standardized testing session where a student sat there, completely blanking on a basic math problem intended for elementary schoolers. It wasn't a matter of cognitive deficiency or a lack of innate mathematical talent; if that individual had never stepped foot in a math classroom in their life, they likely would have solved it without a second thought. Instead, the only takeaway from years of schooling was the crushing conviction that math is an insurmountable mountain and that they simply aren't "math people." That is the cumulative, disastrous result of spending several hours a week in a classroom for twelve consecutive years. It’s nothing short of a systemic failure.For me, that was a genuine hurdle. And I’m not talking specifically about deciphering archaic American literature; I mean the broader challenge of reading books in a foreign language. It didn't matter if the material was riveting or incredibly dull, or whether it was a massive tome or a slim volume—the struggle remained the same.
Every single experience has served as a lesson, helping me expand my vocabulary and familiarize myself with just about everything under the sun. Some of that knowledge proves more useful today than others, but I certainly don't feel cheated for having spent hours hunched over books with a dictionary by my side. On the contrary, it was worth every second.
I find myself reaching for a dictionary quite frequently, but if the constant interruptions start to derail my flow, I simply pack it in. There’s no point in struggling through it. That’s exactly why I don't bother reading anything in Greek.
That is precisely why I tend to ignore footnotes and endnotes—with the notable exception of Terry Pratchett’s. To any author or editor out there listening: if your idea of good pacing is interrupting my flow thirteen times per page, you might as well go jump in a lake. Do you want me to actually read your book, or are you just trying to force me to read your damn footnotes?
If there are side effects—like people losing interest in reading altogether, or avoiding the classics, or developing a total phobia of math—then the whole outcome ends up being negative.
I remember this one time at an SAT prep center where this person was just staring blankly at a basic middle school math problem, and it was like the explanations were just bouncing right off them. It wasn't because they lacked the brains or the talent, honestly. If they hadn't been forced into math classes all those years, they probably would've figured it out fine. But instead, all they learned from math class was that math is hard and that they're just bad at it. That’s a totally negative result after spending hours every week on it for twelve years. It's just... it's awful.
Linda Price5 said:For God's sake, have some dignity. 😁
Who actually storms the school office because there’s decapitated heads or severed breasts in a required reading?😁 Or bitten-off hands in an elementary textbook?the lack of reading habits at home is just as much to blame
Fine, but what is the point of having those kids in a dedicated reading hour? If Mom and Dad don't read, if they never read to them, if there isn't a single book in the house, and their own IQs aren't exactly staggering—what's the goal? Why sit them in a reading period instead of letting them kick a ball around on the playground? What's the actual utility? To ensure they can answer one extra question about whether they'll watch The Chase? Why waste their time, the teachers' time, electricity, fuel, lightbulbs, or chalk?here is yet another proof of how clueless you all are regarding these wonderful new methods, outcomes, and "innovations" we're constantly bombarded with at workshops and seminars
I'm not talking about that nonsense. I'm talking about proactively following findings from memory and learning psychology, cognitive science—about a biology teacher actually pulling research from high-quality, peer-reviewed journals on science pedagogy from the internet, rather than being oblivious to their existence entirely.
I'd bet anything that the vast majority of your colleagues attending those pretentious, overly ambitious "professional development" sessions haven't the slightest clue about test-enhanced learning or spaced repetition. They likely don't know how to take effective notes, and even if they do, they aren't passing it on. Unless they teach psychology, they probably know nothing about working memory limits or strategies for long-term encoding.
And they don't know because nobody in education cares about using science as a tool to uncover reality, nor is there any belief that a teacher's job is to master and apply these tools to make learning more efficient. It doesn't interest them because it doesn't impact their personal lives; most people don't learn anything unless they absolutely have to, mostly because they possess the curiosity of a common houseplant.
| Mom and Dad aren't readers, they didn't read to them, they probably don't even have books at home, and honestly, their IQ might not be that impressive either. So why bother with a reading hour instead of just letting them kick a ball around at the park? What's the actual benefit? Are they going to learn how to answer one extra question just so they can watch The Chase? Why waste their time, the teachers' time, electricity, gas, lightbulbs, or chalk? |
wanderingbadger44 said:It feels like everyone is just pretending he’s actually good
Tolkien! 🤦
The truth is, he’s essentially literary junk, which is why you won't find him getting any serious attention in American English departments or literature programs. Honestly, most people wouldn't have even heard his name if it weren't for those massive movie franchises, because his work just doesn't hold much weight on its own.
And even if we set that aside, let's be real: nobody is picking up his books unless they're looking to catch up on the films.
Linda Price5 said:You have a point. 😁
urbantinker8, I’m still struggling to grasp the fundamental purpose of assigned reading; at least from my perspective, its utility remains entirely elusive. 😁 If the sole objective is to assassinate the classics, it would be far more cost-effective to simply print posters that read "Dostoevsky being stupid" and plaster them all over the school hallways. There is absolutely no need to bother teaching the literature at all. 😁
Linda Price5 said:And if you haven't felt like reading since you were a kid, then frankly, nobody gives a damn about your opinion.
Look, urbantinker8, someone who has been a reader since childhood will likely end up well-educated regardless of whether they ever step foot in a classroom. In my view, the true purpose of school should be to serve those who didn't grow up with a book in their hands—to act as a bridge that introduces them to literature and helps them develop a genuine love for reading.A parent simply cannot be held entirely responsible for everything that goes wrong. It’s an impossible standard to meet, and frankly, it's an unfair one. To suggest that a child's every failure or stumble is a direct reflection of parental inadequacy is to ignore the sheer complexity of human development. Think of it like trying to steer a ship through a massive storm in the middle of the Atlantic. A captain can have the best training, the most reliable vessel, and the clearest charts from the Coast Guard, but they still can't control the gale winds or the rogue waves. They can manage the rudder, sure, but once those elements hit, the outcome is no longer solely in their hands. Children are individuals with their own temperaments, peer influences, and increasingly, their own agency. You can provide the best foundation possible—steady guidance, a stable home, and solid values—but you aren't building a robot programmed to follow instructions. You are raising a person. Once they step out into the world, there are a thousand variables at play that no amount of parenting can account for. Blaming a parent for every deviation from the expected path isn't just reductive; it's logically flawed.
If that's the case, what is even the point of sending kids to school? What purpose does it actually serve if there's absolutely no support or recourse once a parent has either failed them or done their job poorly in the first place?
I’m still reading today, too. My Kindle has become such an indispensable companion that I honestly feel naked without it—it’s practically a daily essential, right up there with my wallet.
I’ll admit it: there were times when required reading actually managed to sour my entire relationship with books.
There’s a mountain of classics sitting on my shelf that I probably would have actually enjoyed, but I haven't touched a single one. If a book makes the mandatory reading list for high school, it’s clearly garbage.
I am referring back to my own previous post from a little while ago.Linda Price5 As specified by:
If the entire point of education is to drill children into becoming compliant adults—people who will clock in and perform mindless, tedious tasks they find utterly pointless just so they can scrape together enough to pay their electric bills—then I fail to see why we bother them with mandatory literature and a bloated curriculum. Instead, we should just have them sewing garments or sanding down table legs for seven or ten bucks an hour. That would teach them the exact same lesson: how to sit still and mind their own business. At least then, there would be a controlled environment where they’re kept under lock and key while their parents are at work, preventing them from forming street gangs and terrorizing neighborhoods. At any rate, it would actually be productive.
Seven bucks times five hours times one hundred seventy-five school days a year adds up to $2042, and over eight years, we're looking at $49,000.
If we let them listen to audiobooks or podcasts while they're sanding or sewing, they might actually finish those eight years without being completely brainless and uneducated.
The only real headache is figuring out where to lock the teachers up during work hours so they don't start forming gangs and terrorizing local neighborhoods, though I suppose even that could probably be solved.
urbantinker8 said:Well, I suppose it’s pretty obvious that I was actually referring to those high school reading assignments that everyone seems to treat like some sort of looming nightmare.🙄
But, yeah, looking at this thread, I guess I see how that dread starts building up during middle school too, because... well, I don't know, maybe it's just me, but things like *The Outsiders* or *The Giver* or *The Catcher in the Rye* or even *Where the Red Fern Grows*...
I mean, who would actually want to read all that? Like, what's the point, really?😲
Christian Wilson28 said:No, I'm just saying—yeah, maybe I read more than the average person, but it’s hardly a miracle. And honestly, I wasn't some special outlier when it came to hating required reading; people hated those books whether they were avid readers or not.
Look, some titles are actually decent and should stay on the list. But others... good grief, they're practically a death sentence. Of course, people who don't normally read are going to want to read even less after being forced through stuff like that. Not everyone has to love everything, sure, but there are those few specific things that are just painful for everyone—those really ought to be cut.
Back in high school, we had the option to pick five books out of a list of twenty, which was okay, but even then—I would've wanted more choices. Like, fine, let's do Hemingway, but give me a few different works to choose from! Why on earth did we have to do that one guy, Philip? I would've had way more fun analyzing something like *The Catcher in the Rye*. Actually, I did—and I ended up getting three assignments done, but I was basically held up in front of the class as a "bad example," while my classmates were actually clapping for me. And the teacher? Well, they clearly lost their mind. 😬
| Look, I mean, some of these headlines are actually pretty decent and honestly should just stay exactly as they are. But others? Good grief, they're just straight-up lethal. Like, seriously. And of course, the people who don't normally bother reading the news are just going to be even less likely to pick anything up after seeing stuff like that. It's just... yeah. |
| Look, I know not everyone is going to agree with me on this, but there are just those few specific things that everyone finds absolutely exhausting. Honestly? I feel like those parts really should just be cut entirely. |
| Hey there! I was just sitting here thinking about how much fun it is to dive into these discussions. Honestly, I feel like we could talk about this stuff for hours, right? I guess I’m just a little excited to get things moving! Maybe we can all share some thoughts soon. I'm really looking forward to seeing what everyone thinks! I guess someone said: Oh man, honestly? We should probably just start catering to the people who only bother reading the ingredients on a bottle of Dove while they're sitting on the toilet. I mean, that’s clearly where all the decision-making power lies! And hey, if that's the standard, then I guess it makes sense why something like *The Great Gatsby* ended up on the required reading list—a book I swear I can't even wrap my head around today without a mountain of footnotes and translations to explain what's actually happening. At this rate, I might as well just try reading French theater in its original language instead. It would probably be just as productive, right? 😁 |
Linda Price5 said:The real issue arises when you consider that we wouldn't have lost a single second if we had spent that time instead doing something actually productive—like working some mindless side gig for seven bucks an hour while listening to podcasts or hearing Stephen Fry read Harry Potter.
If our guiding principle isn't essentially, "Are the students actually gaining more from this than they would by mindlessly churning out cheap busywork for pennies an hour while listening to a podcast," then we clearly aren't using that as our metric. And we all know, deep down, that it isn't. 😁And just like that, we’re staring down a massive problem. A truly significant one.
We're going to keep having it. 😁 A fish remains entirely unaware of the water surrounding it. It simply exists within that medium, oblivious to the very element that defines its entire reality.
| If our main metric isn't—and I mean for everything in the curriculum, not just the reading list—"are the students gaining more from this than they would from sewing buttons for seven dollars an hour while listening to a podcast," and since we know that definitely isn't our goal 😁, then we are in huge trouble. Like, really big trouble. |
Christian Wilson28 said:Well... not really. Okay, fine—maybe I did read a bit more than the average kid, but let's be honest, everyone in my circle absolutely loathed required reading. Whether we actually picked up a book or not wasn't the real issue; it was the terrible selection of titles they forced on us.
I mean, some of those books aren't even touched again in college because they're so dense or just focus on specific niche parts—but in high school, they expect you to master the whole thing.
And then there's the stuff that's totally age-inappropriate—you know, things you can only truly grasp once you've actually grown up a little.
okay, fine, maybe I read a little more than the average student, but honestly, everyone in my group absolutely hated required reading. whether people were reading or not wasn't the issue in my circle—it was just the specific books they picked for us.
and they're totally not age-appropriate, which is something you might only realize once you've aged a bit.
Christian Wilson28 said:Really? I feel you—I basically grew up in the local library myself. I started transcribing required reading lists when I was just a kid, and honestly, looking back at my middle school and high school years, I probably only actually read three or four titles from those lists. I avoided the rest entirely out of pure spite for being forced to read certain books.
I did pick some up later on and felt pretty bad about misjudging them initially. Some others? Still haven't touched them and don't plan to, though maybe one day if I find the time. For instance, I have zero interest in revisiting *The Catcher in the Rye*, even though I can practically recite *Edge of Sanity* from memory. It’s such a shame they don't just assign an author and let people choose their own titles, like
Nowadays, I’m a moderate reader—actually, not much of a reader at all. I spend my time with all sorts of people, from folks who never touch a book to absolute bibliophiles... and honestly, who knows? You meet everyone. There are wonderful people and then there's just straight-up uncultured trash. I really don't think it's my place to judge someone based on their reading list; that's just not how I roll.
Though, granted, I'm not exactly hanging out at dive bars or local sports clubs, so maybe I don't run into as many people who struggle to spell their own names.
Linda Price5 said:Back in my day, the librarian practically had to drag me out of the library by my ear; she was more like a surrogate grandmother to me given how much time I spent there. By seventh grade, I had already started copying assigned readings from older students who had different teachers, and later on, I became a regular fixture at the local bookstore picking up those titles.
There are certain things that seemed utterly moronic and uninteresting to me as a child, even if I did end up reading them, yet I find myself appreciating them quite deeply today.