If teachers and staff at a school have too many students and classes there isn’t time for such meetings or work. This is just one of the stark differences well-funded and underfunded schools. But when the underfunded schools have poorer academic outcomes & more discipline problems the students and parents are blamed “you just can’t teach those kinds of kids”
I assure you I could and I have. And it’s possible to burn your self up doing so making more time than properly exists in a day to do it.
One of the biggest differences between a school with sufficient staff and those without is the time and focus I am able to devote to each student. I have enough time to have meetings where all of the teachers of each student are present and we can discuss not just the disruptive or exceptional students but all students. We can puzzle together if a student is becoming depressed or socially isolated. We can find ways to help students to connect to the material they study. 1/
challenging protocol design problem, mathematical?, help wanted
I have a difficult protocol design problem that I need some suggestions for to explore. Please read the requirements carefully because they are very specific, and leave the "it's impossible" comments at the door, because I *know* that this is a seemingly impossible problem already.
(The problem description is also intentionally generalized and reduced down to its core mathematical problem, to avoid unintentional assumptions.)
I have a distributed protocol. The different parties involved mutually distrust each other. They can each contribute mutations to a shared state log, based on some unspecified authorization algorithm which allows for revoking access of other parties. The parties eventually converge onto an identical view of the state, though temporary partitions may occur.
The problem is that a genuine partition followed by a delayed delivery of mutations, seems indistinguishable from a malicious attempt at subverting an access revocation through backdating of mutations.
In both cases, one or more mutations are received which are dated to a timestamp that was potentially a long time ago, and that may be working off an old version of the state.
There is (currently) no shared clock, and there is a small but non-zero span of time between the most recent accepted mutation from a revoked party, and the actual revocation of their access.
How do I prevent backdating, without losing resilience to partitions?
I'm not necessarily looking for full-blown solutions (though those would be welcome!), but even just pointers on relevant research would be welcome, as long as it is research that accounts for all the properties here: untrusted parties, no shared clock, exploitable timespan before revocation.
As I am getting older, I have come to the conclusion that the trick is not to stop #procrastinating - which would require more willpower than I have to spare - but to procrastinate in a way that will benefit _one_ of my longer-term goals, even if it's not the one I ought to work towards right now.
@0xabad1dea When I was at $ISP tech support in 1998, we had an all-staff email asking us to go to the break room to scream, because although we could mute our own phone mics it was picked up by others.
You know what’s not talked about enough …
Mourning a friendship that doesn’t exist anymore.
Mourning for people who are still alive but are no longer apart of your life.
Mourning over memories.
Mourning over relationships/friendships that just aren’t the same.
Mourning over parts of your story that are no longer talked about or brought up because the people in those memories have taken different paths.
It’s really sad and such a strange feeling to experience.
Anyway. If you’re struggling with this, and thought you were alone … I’m here to say you’re not. It’s real and it sucks.
By the way, I hope this didn't need to be said, but never buy "backlinks", doesn't matter from where. It means you're paying for a spammer's linkfarm. Even if they look legit on the outside.
Native/fluent speakers of languages other than English: please send me an idiomatic translation of the following phrase, and a list of words (excluding stopwords) that you would expect a correct stemming process to result in:
"Can you believe that? Unbelievable!"
(I'm integrating various stemming libraries into an anti-capitalist search engine project and would like to verify that it works correctly for as many languages as possible, at least on a basic level!)
(Note: the bloom filter has nothing to do with 'scaling' in this case, and everything with reducing memory requirements, preventing unnecessary requests, and a secret third goal of the project that is not public yet)
Tijdens een vergadering op mijn werk:
• Stip op de horizon
• Lijnorganisatie
• Duurzaamheid
• AI
Dit waren de meest gebruikte termen. Deze woorden hoor ik bij zo wat elke vergadering. Het maakt niet uit waarover het gaat. In de praktijk betekent het dat
• het doel niet vaststaat,
• anderen het moeten uitvoeren,
• veel energie wordt verspilt en dat
• een gedegen onderzoek naar het gebruik van kunstmatige intelligentie
ontbreekt.
Things done for my search engine project today:
- Improved duplicate indexing prevention both in terms of history size and memory use, through the use of a bloom filter
- Added robots.txt support
- Improved performance measuring
- Added detection of corporate websites
- Added language detection and stemming of varying quality for some 25 languages - please let me know if you know of any good language-specific stemmers!
salty, programming, JS, "you"
And no I don't care if you think it is "moving the ecosystem forward", the material reality is that you are sabotaging people's ability to rely on the tools they are using, and you are a giant asshole for it.
If you think that "moving the ecosystem forward" is done by deliberately breaking people's shit without technical necessity, then your visions of the future are garbage accelerationist bullshit
Technical debt collector and general hype-hater. Early 30s, non-binary, ND, poly, relationship anarchist, generally queer.
- No alt text (request) = no boost.
- Boosts OK for all boostable posts.
- DMs are open.
- Flirting welcome, but be explicit if you want something out of it!
- The devil doesn't need an advocate; no combative arguing in my mentions.
Sometimes horny on main (behind CW), very much into kink (bondage, freeuse, CNC, and other stuff), and believe it or not, very much a submissive bottom :p
My spoons are limited, so I may not always have the energy to respond to messages.
Strong views about abolishing oppression, hierarchy, agency, and self-governance - but I also trust people by default and give them room to grow, unless they give me reason not to. That all also applies to technology and how it's built.