Oh yeah, the math thing. That's almost entirely because all the curricula is being decided by people who don't do math. My wife, who is probably in the top 1% of math talents, tutors on occasion. She spends more time trying to figure out what they're trying to teach, than actually working the math. Usually, after some work, she figures it out and explains the old timey way. The response is almost always "Oh, is that what they're trying to say?".

Most math education is being concocted by education majors experimenting on our children.

Boomer here. I was just young enough to avoid Nam (born in '53) and young enough to see America peak. Unfortunately, I am also young enough to have seen my successful education and employment eventually get shipped off to China before I was ready to retire. I still had a mortgage and 2 kids to send to college. I've made it through. I'm glad to have lived through our golden age. We're past the age of rationality and basically in rot mode now. No better evidence than more than half of the US voted for the orange one. I feel bad for the youngins.

The summary says "standard time year-round, which means more light in the morning and less light in the evening".

I don't think that's right. They should be about the same, more or less, depending on the wobble.

Lots of bad math in the summary.

Such shame I feel for my people. Such shame!

it's

put IT where the moon don't shine.

I'm happy to see an organization tell the orange fascists to put where the moon don't shine.

Wasn't the number 30,000 a couple of days ago? Did they realize that 16,000 were actually doing something useful? Or am I remembering this wrong? Maybe that was Target.

I just read yesterday that the iPhone Air was out of stock in China, because it was selling so well. So, there's that.

McKinsey has been selling something with "No Measurable Benefits" for years before AI. Seems like they would be good at it.

Sorta like MySQL

Isn't this story kind of a dupe from a few days ago? Didn't we fret about this issue like 2 days ago already? The worry is about a small number of guys who generate DNA for bad proteins that someone else makes. But there is no worry about those same kind of guys that do it in-house. I think it's exciting to the /. crowd because they can argue about programatic issues to keeping a small window closed, while the garage door and the back door remain open.

I'm a medicinal chemist. I've been thinking about proteins for 50 years. It took me about two thirds of the way through the article to even figure out what it was about. So this only applies to those who take their DNA sequence to somebody else to get proteins expressed. What about the vast majority who just do it in-house? Frankly, I'm a lot more worried about guns.

I apologize but I've been goobersmacked by the gobbledigook. Could you say it again?

Really! This is the question. There's detectable levels and there's toxic levels. There's acute toxic levels and there's chronic toxic levels. How many orders of magnitude are these things separated. I grow weary of the alarmist crap that we're constantly bombarded with because journalist can't, in general, do math. We need numbers to be informed.

Oh, I'm sorry. I guess 95% of bears is a number after all.