f13.net

Have enjoyed these, didn't know whether to put this in  "TV" (mods move, if necessary)…

…will start off with this recently released interesting one…

Christopher "moot" Poole (4chan founder): The case for anonymity online
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_1UEAGCo30

Much better public speaker than I imagined.

An odd choice for a video to showcase TED, but he did a lot better than I was expecting.

He needs to do a better job articulating his stance on anonymity.  I'm pretty sure he's going to hear questions like those again.

Best TED talks are John Hodgman's and Mike Rowe's

(too lazy to link them atm).

Bill Gates had a very interesting recent one as well.

Seriously? I'm glad you cared enough to hit the post button post but not quite enough to spend the extra 30 seconds to actually contribute links to the thread.

If you guys want to browse, go to the TED Director's channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector), then you can filter by a name on the right or just scroll the list.

Bill Gates (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsgvhP07BC8)
John Hodgman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W51H1croBw)
Mike Rowe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRVdiHu1VCc)

I think most if not all of the TED talks are wonderful, and it's a great "waste" of time to just browse them.

UI design by the guy who made the "Minority report" interface (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6YTQJVzwlI)  <-- watch this (er, well, watch Bill Gates then this, his is way more important)

Mike Rowe's was awesome. His humor fused with the topic kept it interesting from beginning to end, that man probably has too many stories to tell.

Some others I like:

Natalie Merchant sings old poems to life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXVCf5VTHrw

Esther Duflo: Social experiments to fight poverty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zvrGiPkVcs

Jane McGonigal: Gaming Can Make a Better World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE1DuBesGYM

TED talks usually end up in the Useless videos where they shouldn't be.

The one with the Indian guy who did the 'racing game on a piece of paper' virtuality rig was fucking awesome.

Also, that one years ago with the Pictures that can be put together to make a virtual tour blew my fucking mind.

James Randi is awesome (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Z7KeNCi7g)

I was going to post that when I got a moment, but couldn't remember her name. This was definitely a good watch.

Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY)
Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9LelXa3U_I)

Both excellent, IMO.

I'm in love. Thanks for sharing that. Amazing to see such intelligent people share their visions

Yeah, anonymity can be used to bring about positive change, but I think he glossed over the overwhelming negative that is generated by people using anonymity for nefarious means.

I was on board with her kooky brand of crap until she mentioned Castranova. Then, immediately turned is off. Theres a subset of gaming folks who are better at saying lots of nothing instead of making games. Bleh. She's on the Ignore list now.

Posting from phone. Can't edit.

Anyway, sounding intelligent is super easy. Especially when you have a giant sack of numbers and are paid to make sense - any sort of sense - out of them. I really just hate TED talks that don't involve hardware or new software. I need tangible crap not fake crap.

Her clinging to the word Epic ruined it for me.

If she had more purple in her dress it would have been better...

I just don't know what online gaming trends she's been watching. Gamers aren't optimistic because gaming makes them optimistic, they're optimistic about games because games provide a long string of easy victories without the inconvenience of making important choices. The most popular games are nearly brainless theme park rides. Stay on the tracks and the dopamine flows like milk and honey. The roleplaying games Ms. McGonigal and her cadre are making are cute experiments, but all they've produced no actionable solutions and a lot of pseudo-intellectual navel-gazing. At best, multiplayer computer games inspire thought... they don't inspire action. Like Sir Robinson points out, the one place young Americans excel over their international peers is CONFIDENCE. It's easy to be confident when you believe you'll automatically succeed somehow rather than having anything as unpleasant as goals or plans.

Sure Raph, life seems more fun when you find ways treat work like a game. That doesn't imply that games are meaningful work.

Unless you work on them.

I just caught this talk on Retrofitting suburbia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_uTsrxfYWQ). It's definitely worth watching.

Relevant necro, hopefully I don't give up my posting rights.  ;)

I wish I could have gone through high school using this method.  I would much likely have done better in school.  This is nothing short of amazing and while it will take a very long time to implement in schools as a standard (lots of reeducation), it seems well worth it. 

http://www.ted.com/talks/salman_khan_let_s_use_video_to_reinvent_education.html?awesm=on.ted.com_8zCz&utm_campaign=salman_khan_let_s_use_video_to_reinvent_education&utm_content=ted.com-talkpage&utm_medium=on.ted.com-twitter&utm_source=facebook.com

That is awesome. Honestly, I don't think it would take long at all to get this introduced on a large scale. Teachers are smart and flexible people who are never given enough credit. Just have them come in for a couple weeks over the summer to learn the tools and we are ready to rock.

This could change everything, for the better.
This guy could literally have changed the entire education system for the better.

Wow.  :awesome_for_real:

TED :  Once again being utterly fascinating.

 :ye_gods: :heart: :awesome_for_real:

That's brilliant, I wonder where they get contributors from.

5 seconds in and I see Pangea shit. Good luck in red states! The world is 7000 years old.

Edit: also I wonder if parents have an issue with fast learners teaching slow learners instead of getting special awesome kid treatment. That sounds an awful lot like socialism.

To actually comment, concept is awesome. I also see it as one of those easy uptake things, at least to some degree, because most/all teachers are for something that makes their job easier/more effective. This appeals to either/both and has zero barrier to entry. Accessibility is key to this kind of change, and if anything I'd call this grass roots change. Bottom up facilitation that costs no money, requires no investment, and actually makes shit easier/better. Any teacher (barring a retarded schoolboard) could optionally introduce this and then tap the kids that actually do it to help in the sort of peer to peer method he's advocating.

It's like turning kids into mini-education bittorrents, seeding education to leachers who refuse to contribute but will gladly download all the free shit possible.

I'm sure this will be unpopular, but I can't help but have a negative gut reaction to that teaching video.   First, let me say that it's a brilliant technique for building skill in the repetition of a process.  I think the metrics for tracking progress are equally outstanding... assuming teachers know and understand assessment.  With a willing group of students, I'm sure that a tool like this could produce wonderful outcomes on many of the commonly used assessment tools.  I could see something like this making many happy K-6 administrators. 

Unfortunately, this type of learning is not at the core of where our educational system is failing.  The system is failing in the nurturing and production of analytical thought and creative thinking.  We need tools that will highlight those skills.  These tutorials are wonderful for helping students understand the mechanics of an operation, the background of a historical fact, or the memorization of a factoid.  While great for building a lexicon or a foundation of understanding it does little to generate free thinkers.  Every year I get classes full of college freshmen that can crank out calculations with ease.  They're dumbfounded when I ask them on an exam to describe what the number they just calculated tells them about the system.  In other words, our students have little trouble performing a prescribed method.  They seem to have no concept of how it's used, why it's used, and what the method tells us about more abstract components of the system. 

I think you're wrong.  I think the type of change he's discussing will allow much more time and focus to be brought to bear on just those type of problems.

But I'm not going to argue with you.  Because Ultimately I don't give a shit.

Maybe you're right. 

I've been listening to people talk about how "technology in the classroom would revolutionize teaching" for the last 20 years.  All I'm seeing is an average college freshmen that has gotten worse at math and almost unable to read with comprehension.  I'm jaded beyond repair. 

Speaking as someone who has family in teaching over here for the last 20 years, I know what you mean.  But, like many, many, many industries, they've only made the shit way of doing things more technological.  They haven't addressed the actual problems WITH technology.  That TED talk at least took a different shot at it.

One of his major points in that presentation is that once the foundations are established through ten correct answers in a category, then they can move on to application.  I can't remember how exactly he states it, but once the core is in place they can begin working on problems, applying the core concepts to real world issues.

The core concepts can't really be gamed by students; it's real time in the classroom.  If they can't be gamed, then once everyone has an understanding of the core, then everyone can feel engaged when trying to apply it. 

It flips the whole system on its head...  Instead of dreading rote homework, going home to watch lectures and doing the application in class, well it just seems better.  You don't get a standing ovation after a speech, with Bill Gates calling your process "the future of eduction" without *something* being right about it. 

I think maybe Nebu was trying to get at something that also was gnawing at me. The whole thing is based on some assumptions that aren't explicitly stated. The whole system is predicated on non-compulsive or unenforceable participation. The mantra we hear (and which is true) is that it's very hard to foster kids when there's a bad home environment, or even just no home support in an otherwise ok environment. That's one of the biggest culprits in kids failing at education, and probably the biggest in lower income situations.

He made the point to touch on that implicitly by talking about mythical Indian kid that is apparently taking care of family and using this as his education, but I don't think that is what you can assume for the baseline. Maybe I'm being overly unfair, but it just strikes me that this doesn't solve or even touch the problem for what ails kids under middle class in the US, which is a large portion of our education problem.

On the other hand, this would do wonders for kids like who I was. Tech savvy with very busy/self-involved parents, hate homework, at least average+ intelligence. In my school it would have been a godsend for me, and probably overall elevated the education of most people coming out of my school significantly. But we were white and middle-class.

So I guess what I'm saying is: this is fucking amazing for already functional classrooms/schools where budget is spread thin or better, and probably scales well with income towards the upper middle class. And it probably doesn't do much for a lot/most kids who are already fucked.


Sorry, stream of thought. My conclusion is that it is as awesome as I thought, with caveats. I'm skeptical of how helpful it is to the people who need better education the most. It doesn't fix the fact that some areas have no money for: non burnt-out schools, the teachers in those schools, the parents to have any energy left after 2+ jobs to do anything besides provide food/shelter for their kids, or the kids to get requisite technology to even use it. That last requirement is easier every day but the rest are the same as ever or worse. Kids starting with a shit hand in life have a somewhat better chance to turn it around, but I'd really like to see how much a difference.

As an example, my gf is about to get her doctorate utilizing similar techniques that Khan uses.  It's called a fuckin online education.  Been around for years in the adult sector.
The only thing he's really selling is getting that same online education in the hands of Undergrads, grade, and high schoolers.

Anyways, ALL of her lectures and study work are done and tracked online, with books at home with interactive chats if needed.  Then there are real labs and discussions once a week on average, then internships, etc.

The biggest issue is the University gets to rape the students of tuition with a system that costs them nearly nothing... which is where the REAL problem lays with giving public schooling such an opportunity.  It's one of those things where the rich kids dont like to share.  And once it becomes truly free with accreditation, all those private Unis that use such a system are shit outta luck... along with the bloat and excess already in the public system; it'll have to be cut out and Principals wont be getting their phat budgets anymore.

I've always been for the whole futurism "Day Club" concept though.  It's been around for a helluva long time, but never had the tech. to implement it.  Now we do so heh, make it happen I guess.  I've already got plans to put my own kid (if/when I have one) into such an education because frankly it's vastly superior to any current public/private out there.   Accreditation is becoming less and less relevant and/or more accepting every day, so personal training becomes more viable as long as you have the skillz.

This.  

I'd also add that about 10% of American students will diligently use the resources at their disposal.  The other 90% are looking for ways to shortcut the system.  Then you have the issue of classroom disruption, administrative cockblocks, and assessment fiascos.  

If you want to fix education, get society on board.  Then all the nifty gadgets will be useful to more than 10% of the people sitting behind them.  

 :oh_i_see:

Yeah yeah.  I'll shaddap now. 

Isnt tracked online video education a 'shortcut to the system' in itself?  Your argument seems to be a bit circular in this regard.  Also, when the classroom is effectively "clubified" how is it that there'd be MORE disruption, cockblocks, and assessment problems?

Wow. He actually has a math tech tree. That's pretty cool.

I ran out of BIO-E points before I got advanced calculus.  Time to grind some more.

We need level up animations for completing a piece.

Yeah I spent an hour last night grinding on math and actually realized how adding left to right in my head for larger numbers is done, versus the traditionally taught right to left. Im pretty sure that is an IRL level up.

I wasn't that impressed. What the education system needs is an entirely different approach to interaction between teachers and students, and a different process of assessment. Rote learning made easier by technology does not bring that.

I think it would depend on subject and teacher. I had absolutely shit horrid math teachers in high school. They would explain things one way one day, then correct themselves the next day. I'm still unsure what a negative squared is because they taught it one way, then tested it another. All it taught me was to ignore my math teachers. And quit taking math classes.

If I had had the ability to select classroom learning or take these videos and online tests, I damn well would have taken it online for math.

Putting the teacher into a mentor role where it's about social interaction and checking up on kids making sure mom isn't watching the videos and taking the tests for Johnny is awesome, the funnest time I had in math was seeing it in practical use. Going outside and measuring away from the building and using a surveying tool to determine the height of the school's smokestack and computing how tall it was was pretty cool.  (Then again, so was playing with scarlet fever and not realizing it until I completed all the bacteria tests - go A Streptococcus!)

You and I must have attended the same high school. 

No that was WayAbvPar and myself.

-2²  =  -2 x -2  =  4

-2³  =  -2 x -2 x -2  =  4 x -2  =  -8

I'm absolutely not the guy to be teaching math, because I absolutely do not, and never had, the discipline to do the homework.

On the other hand, you could watch a horrendous public speaker and twat attempting to whistle into the darkness with some horrific facts that ought to make sane people die a little inside.

Twat In Question. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIwrV5e6fMY)

About 20 mins in, when the applause started I wondered how many of those people went out and had a Big Mac afterward.

It did make me realize it's time to start teaching my 12 year old to cook, though, as it's when I began to learn.

Hes not wrong. I enjoyed his talk, however he does need to stand still.

Salman Khan never stands still it seems (hasnt for years).  I await the new Chuck Norris references.

I was referring to Jamie Oliver.