The problems with a physical note card system are:
- I have to use the computer & mobile phone to enter and receive all my work, so it makes sense to consolidate the todo list(s) into those systems, instead of adding a third one. Having to remember to keep a physical bundle near me all the time, with a working pen, feels clunky.
- My handwriting is messy and this causes various problems. I can't really read it at a glance; longer messages take longer to decode; something about the non-uniformity of it also throws me off. I don't relish the thought of consulting a pile of my handwriting multiple times in an hour.
- I frequently cross off old items and add and/or modify new items. This is very easily done with a text file but sounds like a mess with note cards: keeping the empty cards around, scratching off or erasing existing ones, etc. With GitHub's commit history, I can even get a holistic view of how it's changed over the day, not possible with physical cards.
- A LOT of the value of my system comes from being able to view past days todo lists, to see what's getting done and what isn't; I do this daily. Obviously keeping up w/today's tasks stretches the physical card system to its limits; extending that to the past 7 days sounds like a nightmare.
This article sounds like the usual ideological objections, lots of vague claims that amount to “I don’t like it”.
There is nothing more threatening to a failing institution than a solution that delivers results.
The US education sector is quick to embrace any new fad that sounds good but doesn’t work, building thinking classrooms is the latest. Productive struggle is another.
Yes learning takes time, but it doesn't have to be painfully slow and unproductive.
The education system in US is a disaster and getting worse. The response from schools like the San Francisco school district has been to lower standards and remove higher level material.
I see tremendous potential in Ai tutoring. I use chatgpt to help me learn new material daily. Why should school be any different?
The article is saying something is lost when the algorithm becomes the teacher, as when the AI is the instructor.
1-on-1 teaching (with the parent as teacher) is not that; whatever problems it has, it's never a problem of a too-powerful algorithm.
Quoting an AI summary (because I'm looking for a quick answer here):
Mexico has become the primary financial beneficiary of cocaine money today. Mexican cartels now control the most lucrative parts of the supply chain - smuggling into the US market and wholesale distribution. They've essentially become the "middlemen" who buy cocaine from Colombian producers at relatively low prices and then sell it in the US at much higher prices, capturing most of the profit margin.
Colombia remains important as a producer of coca and cocaine, but the economics have changed dramatically. Colombian groups now often function more as suppliers to Mexican cartels rather than controlling the entire supply chain themselves. The raw materials and initial processing generate far less revenue than the final distribution stages.
I know that is a hurdle I have with my kids. They complain that jogging/running hurts. It is hard to convince people that that never really changes, and that it also hurts for the people that are doing it every day. Obviously acute pains are a different thing, but there is a reason recovery is a vital part of exercise. We all have to recover from pushing limits. You can't expand your limits without pushing, though.
There's no particular reason why running on asphalt, or even running on a treadmill, shouldn't hurt. It might! It's not a natural surface. And hard surface + modern shoes might not be a good enough combo to overcome the pain it creates.
I live near a beach and run on sand every other day; I don't have body pain problems. But change the surface and I think I would.
As far as I can tell, as far as your entertainment options go, literary fiction is THE best option to exercise your mind.
Ranked, in order, it's: literary fiction, nonfiction, computer games, movies, TV.
"Meta-analyses show fiction reading has stronger associations with cognitive skills than nonfiction, with medium-sized benefits for verbal abilities and general cognition. Fiction enhances social cognition by exercising the brain's default network involved in theory of mind. Reading fiction increases brain connectivity, particularly in language areas and sensorimotor regions, with effects lasting beyond the reading session."