Now imagine if college math classes, instead of focusing on forcing students to not use calculators and instead deal with simplified numbers all the time, were taught to use tools like Matlab to learn more advanced mathematics and further the general human knowledge? Imagine if instead of focusing so much on hand-circuitry analysis, we instead were taught to use circuit simulators to solve the same problems. Still teach the theory behind it, but those that don’t specifically need to know it shouldn’t have to be put through the same pains.

In Computer Science, we’re taught to use libraries (at some point in our education, hopefully) so we don’t constantly “reinvent the wheel” with complicated problems. The idea is that we save time by having these “black boxes” that give us the answers we need. While we still need people to understand the concepts behind how these “black boxes” work to support the development of these tools, there shouldn’t be so much time and emphasis on learning those. Those who want to understand the concepts more can learn so on their own time, without slowing down the overall pace of our education.

As I’m getting ready to start my career and after two summer internships doing relevant work, I find it highly irritating that much of what I needed to learn I either was able to learn on the fly in a few hours instead of the better part of a semester, or not taught at all. Other things that I have learned haven’t proven useful, or have become irrelevant in lieu of something that incorporates those concepts in well defined, highly used, and properly-optimized packages. I feel like I’ve been robbed, and that I could have learned almost everything I learned in 4 years of college in one year on my own. I came into college expecting to learn new, advanced concepts and techniques, but instead found out that I had pretty much already learned most of it. There are a few classes which were exceptions to this rule, but my point is that our education system has it where I spent 4 years learning what probably should have only taken 1 or 2.

I have some friends who aren’t as lucky. Some of them are expected to be future scientists or engineers, but are forced to learn stuff like calculus without the use of calculators. They take classes that, for the most part, don’t even prepare them for the real world (even the real world of academia!). Many of them are expected to learn a lot of things on their own, yet are given homework, quizzes, or tests that looks more at if they can do arithmetic than whether or not they understand the concepts.

The real future of education should have immediate feedback on student work. With online homework systems and virtual schools, we already have many of the tools needed to get a full education online. Sure, a student could pass an exam with notes and books in front of them, but what’s the real problem with that? If they don’t understand the concepts, they won’t get by. It will be quickly evident to anyone talking to this person that they didn’t learn the concepts they should have. Also, in the real world, anyone can look up information they need quickly. Most programmers have to constantly look things up because of the ever-changing nature of the field. Academics have to cite sources in their papers and will verify everything before publishing (lest they be ridiculed for making absurd claims based on incorrect assumptions that a quick googling would have found to be wrong).

I find it amazing and horrible that here we are, in 2012, and our education system hasn’t changed. Sure, professors have websites and use powerpoint, but overall, it’s still a system of “memorize-cram-regurgitate.” Employers still expect everyone to at least get a Bachelor’s degree, even though someone could be self-taught with material found from MIT’s OpenCourseWare or sites like Khan Academy. We have people drowning in student loan debt to get degrees for fields where they’re not even guaranteed jobs, but are guaranteed not to have a job if they don’t get the degree. Getting a degree neither guarantees you the proper education nor the tools you’ll need to be successful. It simply serves as an archaic prestige, practically a hazing before being able to go on with life. Don’t go to college and you’re considered uneducated, a failure, and locked out of most jobs (and don’t even bother trying to become a scientist!).

In a world that’s seeing tough economic conditions and rising tuition costs, we can’t keep this up. I’m not advocating lowering standards, but instead raising the level of high school education. Anyone with a high school degree should be able to be allowed to prove their worth and show either experience (for instance, show off programming projects or scientific research done) or knowledge in a specific area to get the jobs needed. Higher education should be available to all, with universities serving as research institutes, and diplomas being available to anyone who can show their worth in knowledge instead of cash and facts.

Dear Mark Emmert,
Today, the University of Central Florida announced its NCAA violations, and the resignation of Athletics Director Keith Tribble and Assistant Football Coach David Kelly. As a senior here at UCF, I’ve heard of the past violations UCF had with recruiting and rumors of some issues with some interesting characters. While I don’t know any of the specifics of what happened, I do know that this has affected some of my favorite student-athletes.
Take, for instance, AJ Rompza. He’s about my age and my height (5′ 10″), and people told him growing up that he couldn’t play basketball, he was too short. He’s strong and motivated, and sure enough got into UCF and played some amazing games. He’s good friends with Marcus and Jeff Jordan, sons of basketball legend Michael Jordan. Rompza’s excitement about UCF brought them over here, and they all fell in love with the school the same way I did.
Reading their posts on Twitter, I noticed that they’re quite smart and motivated. Rompza’s tweets have motivated me to work harder in school and life to get what I really want. Jeff Jordan often speaks about current issues and posted some slides of an old presentation he did about nuclear power plants on fault lines shortly after the Japan earthquake. Oh and did I mention Rompza also wrote for the New York Times and has his own book out? I can’t think of many college students who can say that, let alone one who is a student-athlete.
But then if you look to some other popular schools in Florida, you see a much more dismal picture. One school has the nickname “University of Felons” because their student-athletes get arrested all the time. These players have a “go-to” lawyer that always seems ready to help out these players, even when they come from poorer families. This lawyer may claim he is following the regulations, but everybody knows that they are toeing the line and that, in reality, are violating the ideas behind the rules.
So what I ask is this: that the NCAA begin looking more at those who violate the idea of being a student-athlete. It’s hypocritical to rain down on some student-athletes who may have been friends with someone who happens to be a professional agent, while turning a blind eye at institutions who continually have problems with their student-athletes getting arrested for DUI charges, among other things. It shouldn’t be OK for student-athletes to get away with crimes because they have lawyers who are fans of the team. It also shouldn’t be OK for student-athletes to get punished for having certain people praise their institution.
I hope that these issues get resolved quickly and fairly by the NCAA. I hope that this doesn’t interfere with the ability for student-athletes and their fans to enjoy a great season and doesn’t interfere with academics either. If the NCAA does impose harsh penalties on UCF and its players, I hope that the NCAA considers the lives it may be impacting and considers imposing strict penalties on all those who violate the ethics of being a student-athlete (such as those who get in trouble with the law, and the institutions that seem to have a rampant problem of that). I hope the NCAA sees their policies as hypocritical and flawed, and that they will focus on punishing those who commit blatant and grievous violations of the rules to the point of affecting the game or image of the school or the NCAA as a whole.
As the famous line from Bad News Bears goes “Let Them Play!”

Sincerely,
Jeremy Mayeres

Let’s imagine Alice and Bob are a couple who make a combined income of $250,000 a year. For the sake of simplicity, let’s say that’s their adjusted gross income (AGI) so that we actual deal in that tax bracket (so in reality, they’re making more, but after deductions and other neat little loopholes, they get that number as their income). So that’s a pretty big number, let’s break it down into more manageable numbers.

Dividing equally across 12 months, they’re making $20,833 (and change) a month. To put this in perspective, a minimum-wage (say $7.50/hr) employee working 40 hours a week every week (52 weeks) makes $15,600 a year. So this family could hire someone at minimum wage to work full time cleaning, cooking, getting the mail, or whatever and pay their entire yearly salary in a month and have money left over.

A family plan with two people sharing almost unlimited minutes with unlimited texts and data comes out to about $150/month. Let’s say they live in a reasonable house for two people and their rent or mortgage is, say $3000/month. Power bill is maybe $200/month at most. Cable and TV are an additional $100/month. Count groceries as $300 a month (which is pretty damn lavish, I go around $25-30 a week, or close to $100 a month), car payments at another $200 (with insurance at $50) and we’re at $4000/month. Miscellaneous other expenses may chip away more than that, but if I were budgeting my ideal life, this would be pretty sweet. In fact, a family making about $60,000 a year could live like this.

Dividing equally across 52 weeks, $250,000 is $4,807 (and change) a week.  So this family can take care of all their month’s bills in a week’s paycheck. So what about the other weeks? Where does that money go? Well, chances are, if you have this money you will start thinking about investments. This is the dividing line between the different “classes” everyone is talking about. Someone making $250,000 a year can live a nice life (and not have to worry about having enough money to eat or pay rent) and have money left over to invest. Alice and Bob can put money aside in stocks, retirement accounts, savings, bonds, CDs, etc. and have money just sitting there, generating interest, dividends, or gains. The fact that they have money means they can get more money, simply by having money! Investing (if done right) can be an upward spiral. Even the compound interest formula shows an exponential increase over time.

Someone who makes the minimum wage cannot afford a nice home or the other things on my list. They barely make enough to feed their own mouths. If the rich couple has a kid, they can buy all the nice things and support their child well. If a poor family has a kid, what do they do? Do we tell them not to reproduce? Do we let the kid starve? No, we live in a society where we don’t let that happen. We’re taught since we were young to care for others. The Bible teaches to “love thy neighbor.” Yet here we are, figuring how we can cut programs that support the general welfare of fellow human beings just to keep the rich happy?

The real class warfare is being fought by the rich against the poor and middle class. You have Florida Governor Rick “Voldemort” Scott who implemented a ridiculous plan to drug test people applying for welfare (those applying would pay for the test and if they passed they would get reimbursed). The results, however, are not looking to good for Scott. Not only is this not saving the state money, but it’s also going on the assumption that poor people are more likely to do drugs. News flash! Drugs are expensive! Yet I don’t see us drug-testing bank executives who have taken HUGE bonuses after being bailed out by the government.

Cuts to education keep poor families poor. A good education and scholarships can let smart kids from lower-class families move up and make something of themselves. A good education system means we produce bright minds that will go on to create marvelous technologies that will create new jobs. These jobs, however, require skills. So we can have lots of jobs available, but we need an investment in education so we have people to fill those jobs.

So the next time you hear someone claiming “class warfare” against the rich, remember that nobody wants to be poor. Everyone would like to make $250,000+ a year. If taxes make you want to make less, then you probably don’t deserve that high of a pay for how stupid you are. You pay your taxes because you are enjoying the services of society. You are a human, and you are not “entitled” to take whatever you want from this world. We have rules in place to protect private property, but in exchange we ask payment to help protect that property from others by police force, from damage by fires and building codes, by definition from laws and courts, from other countries by our military, and to help you get it by ensuring you can grow and live in a safe environment, where the food is safe to eat and the water is safe to drink. We have an education system so that you can learn about things to get a good job and interact with others around the world, and so that other people can be good employees or contractors.

And yet ironically, the same people that are against having that basic system still want a government to tell me who I can marry, what kind medical practices are okay or not, which deity is the right one, and what words are okay to say? Their priorities are seriously messed up.

One of the most obvious differences in freedoms is the drinking age. In the US, you cannot have alcohol if you are under 21 years of age. I’m 20 years old now, and I was able to drink beers, wine, and mixed drinks all around Europe without ever being asked for ID. How does that count as “freedom.” The insanity, though, is that I can go to Walmart and buy a rifle just like that, whereas Europe tends to have stricter laws on weapons. As a nation that has stores check if you are over 18 just for buying WD-40 (yes, I was carded at Walmart today for buying WD-40!), you’d think guns would have stricter limitations, but no. You can be trusted with high-power weapons and get shipped off to war, get married, and go in debt once you hit 18, but drinking beer is too dangerous. One claim I even heard in support of the 21 drinking age was that alcohol can damage a developing brain (which develops until you hit 21). Funny though, because a bullet in the brain is a lot worse, but you can be in the military at 18.

Another thing about Europe is a general freedom of speech and the press. The US has clear censorship on broadcast television and radio, and they get away with doing so because they don’t want things that are “obscene.” Funny, I didn’t see an asterisk anywhere in the first amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Nope, no asterisk. Yet somehow we mustn’t have anything “indecent.” Any American traveling to Europe will be shocked to see nudity on TV around midnight. But Europeans aren’t shocked at all. Kids shouldn’t be up that late, so if they see it than the parents are at fault (or just don’t care. After all, it’s just boobs). Or maybe the definition of decency is different. In the US, we glorify war. Violence doesn’t shock people here, but talk about sex and you’ve brewed up a shit-storm. In Europe, it’s the opposite. Sex is fine, it’s natural, but war and violence is frowned upon.

I’m generally amazed at how Americans think they live in the freest country in the world. They don’t realize that this country is still stuck with puritan laws and mindsets that stifle our basic freedoms of expression. Even with religion, this country barely recognizes gay marriage, let alone gay adoption, and claim grounds on this being a “christian nation.” First off, there’s the freedom of religion and separation of church and state. Next up, Catholic countries in Europe allow gay marriages and even gay adoptions. They’re not morally corrupt, they just don’t have an asterisk next to “free” like the US pretty much has.

Of course, this opens up many questions. If the government pays for your healthcare, then they will start passing laws to prevent people from doing things that will get them sick (smoking, drinking, etc.). I’m not a huge fan of these “nanny laws,” as it’s not really what this country was founded upon.

But what really rubs me the wrong way with this whole debate is how people are going after this topic. It’s like watching children fight. The Republicans are name-calling and saying this is the end of the world. The worst is when they say things like “oh the government shouldn’t get involved in issues like this.” Really? So were they also opposed to No Child Left Behind? Where was their outcry when Bush passed that? Or the PATRIOT Act? And with that logic, they’d be OK with abortion being legal, right (otherwise it’s a healthcare-related law).

While we’re at it, we should repeal Medicare. I hear old people criticize Obama and healthcare, but they get to get a free motorized wheelchair paid for by taxpayers? I’m paying into Social Security, but everyone knows that by the time I get to that age, there will be no money left (this has been said for years). You cannot be against healthcare for all if you reap the benefits of our current Medicare system.

I think a healthcare reform isn’t necessarily a bad thing. If we fix the holes where money is leaking and make the system efficient, we can actually save money in the long run. But if we start making concessions on what should be covered and pass a bill riddled with pork, loopholes, and concessions for the wealthy, then the public will lose in this.

People need to stop picking sides on this issue just because of party lines. Making your argument against healthcare because Obama “is a communist” is stupid and childish. It’s interesting to see the people that were always like “you can’t make fun of the President” and “If you don’t like this country, then leave!” when Bush was in power now do the exact opposite now that a Democrat is in power.

This is all just my opinion as of now. It’ll be interesting to see what happens, and I really don’t think that Obama will drive this country into the ground (we could say Bush did that already…). A lot of people will probably have differing opinions, and I encourage intelligent discussion in the comments. Any comments which are hateful, trolling, or otherwise irrelevant will be deleted.

One thing I realized about the iPad WiFi + 3G (as they’re calling the 3G version) is that one could have it as their only computer for a rather low cost. For about $730, you can get the 32GB 3G version, pay $30/month and have access to the Internet everywhere AT&T has coverage (it seems to be able to revert to EDGE if 3G is unavailable). Pay $30 more and you have a full office suite. This satisfies what most people use netbooks for (web browsing and typing documents). It beats paying $800+ for a laptop plus $60+/month for internet (or even the $40+/month for cable/DSL). Albeit, you can’t multitask and you’d probably want the keyboard as well, but the original iPhone retailed at around the same price, and it didn’t even have the App Store.

The iPad isn’t as revolutionary as Apple made it seem. The iPhone was revolutionary. It brought touchscreen phones a huge boost, and when they opened it up for apps it also revolutionized the industry. Suddenly we have a new job title: iPhone developer. They had designed a system that was intuitive, creative, and successful. The iPad uses the same system, only bigger. Sure, the new apps look nice and with the added real estate, you can do more on the screen, but it’s not a revolution in the industry. If you look at old blog posts rumoring this device, it seems that the “giant iPhone” sentiment was taken as a joke. A family friend of mine joked once at an AT&T store, pointing at the giant iPhone display and asking if she could have that exact phone, since she wouldn’t have to worry about losing it. It took them a while to realize she was joking, but it’s not that funny when they actually make the “giant iPhone (or iPod Touch).”

Many think that Apple is holding out on this release of the iPad in order to release a second generation iPad with camera, faster speed, and whatever else people are asking for. One thing they could be waiting for is the development of 4G/LTE. This could be why the rumored Verizon announcement didn’t happen, since they may be waiting for the second generation to do this, or the June “International Edition” could have CDMA iPhones/iPads, with AT&T ‘s exclusive iPhone contract ending around the same time.

My recommendation on this is to wait. While it is still a cool device and can prove quite useful, it still seems crippled and that a refresh, similar to what they did with iPod Touches (where they added a speaker, side volume controls, Nike+, and it seemed to run better), will make it better. Who knows, maybe the iPhone OS 4.0 will bring multithreading to the iPad and solve at least one concern. I’d give the iPad (with 3G option, otherwise it really is just a giant iPod Touch) a 7/10 for being useful and relatively inexpensive for an Apple product, but it has its flaws and shortcomings, and left a lot of people a bit disappointed.