mrangle

70 ms·

721.
by mrangle 4y ago
You must have a huge "democratic" beef with books. Those being the dominant largely solitary-voiced format that people pay for. Before now, I've read anything that correlated them to being counter to democracy.
722.
by mrangle 4y ago
Expect more of these international agreements, at an increasing pace over the next couple of decades. Soon focused not just on international waters but on nations. With the agreements having the color of law in the eyes of voters, but not t
723.
by mrangle 4y ago
The Montreal Protocol didn't require military enforcement. This will. And this is its significance.
724.
by mrangle 4y ago
The theory of spreading Life Beyond Earth has obstacles that I've never seen it adequately approach. It suffers from worldwide popularized optimism to which it early succumbs without a proper fight. That it doesn't have to, much l
725.
by mrangle 4y ago
Error is the easiest and most common government excuse for inexcusable malice. Which means that people shouldn't allow for that excuse in the context of grand scale failures like 2008, 2003, etc.
726.
by mrangle 4y ago
The stock crashed because of the initial pseudo bank run due to high interest rates on capital (at least that's the reason given for withdrawals), and the bank's subsequent failure to make up the difference after selling a treasur
727.
by mrangle 4y ago
Censorship Bills are garbage for democracy. Anyone not reflexively alarmed by the dishonest newspeak phrasing, specifically surrounding "safety", needs to brush up on history. There's nothing more axiomatic in a democracy tha
728.
by mrangle 4y ago
Time improves all output, including from "fast thinkers". To illustrate no writers, including students, can produce their first rate work on their first draft. Much of the time it takes not only revision(s), but time away from the
729.
by mrangle 4y ago
>I have no particular objection to this, but doesn't it imply that the SAT requirement is superfluous, with the combination of grades and extra-curriculars adequately measuring what the colleges want to measure? No. You are making a
730.
by mrangle 4y ago
No one is disputing the fact that there are advantages to being legacy, at least in terms of giving the application a hard look so as not to unduly disappoint donors and other people in the "club" that is the entire reason that no
731.
by mrangle 4y ago
Why should you believe that it is "happening here"? Let alone at a significant rate. Why is this wild conjecture worth a discussion? Give me a break. As a clinician that evaluates disabilities, it is very difficult to fake one. Th
732.
by mrangle 4y ago
You seem to have missed the point of my prior post, and you misunderstand how legacy admissions work. Dropping the rhetorical nuke of "systemic racism" doesn't cover for that. Read my prior post again. Legacy gets one looked
733.
by mrangle 4y ago
>I'm confused. You seem to be suggesting that extra-curricular activites are in fact an accurate indicator, contrary to the SAT proponents? I'm unsure how you arrived at that conclusion. I'll chalk it up to me being uninte
734.
by mrangle 4y ago
Respectfully, the issue of unprovided testing accommodations is only relevant for kids with a disability. This would not apply to everyone else. Only to kids with an unidentified disability. Which will be more in the underprivileged group,
735.
by mrangle 4y ago
Even the most expensive prep schools tend to do limited SAT test prep, if any. Poor kids can technically access the same private test prep as rich kids, and whether they actually can or not, financially speaking, has nothing to do with the
736.
by mrangle 4y ago
There are no bottom-barrel legacy admissions. The "club", which includes the assurance of giving legacies a hard look, is largely why these Universities are desirable for non-legacy candidates. In general, but also University depe
737.
by mrangle 4y ago
"Poor test taker", without fail, is a bs excuse for people who are lesser academically talented but cannot bear to admit it. With a couple of exceptions that I list at the end. Doing well on these tests is absolutely as important
738.
by mrangle 4y ago
That's an urban myth perpetuated by people interested in generalized grievance. At least from the period I attended prep school, and beyond. From the mid-1990's. Almost in-total, the "old boys" applicants are not under-q
739.
by mrangle 4y ago
With all due respect, that's not right. Any student attending a prep school from kindergarten, or otherwise very early, will have their development accelerated as compared to a child who attends an average school. The effect compounds
740.
by mrangle 4y ago
People can participate in the social life of campus at any college. The problem with using this supposed socializing metric at the expense of more academically qualified kids is that it just shuffles the more academically talented kids to a
741.
by mrangle 4y ago
Magnet programs operating from kindergarten on are one possible solution. The problem is that these programs are being effectively phased out because less-astute normals are insulted that everyone doesn't qualify. Which is the inverse
742.
by mrangle 4y ago
That's right. Now add the fact that people can have a thirty point swing in score between attempts and without a difference in studying. Total education and intelligence are largely what determines one's score. Beyond basic studyi
743.
by mrangle 4y ago
There's virtually no such thing as ringers taking tests. The majority of rich kids, whose parents are serious about college, are tracked through prep schools beginning with kindergarten. Its more rare than not that such a kid underperf
744.
by mrangle 4y ago
These ISP's are suffering under the delusion that they are in business with Netflix. No solvent business would agree to what they are asking. Its a devil's pact. Though, I don't blame them for asking. It never hurts. Except p
745.
by mrangle 4y ago
Part of the problem might be that commentators are going to want to willfully conflate intelligence "confidence" with a more pseudo science-y sounding "confidence score" that sounds like a bastard hybrid of research crit
746.
by mrangle 4y ago
Although presently there is a strong institutional drive to disconnect nearly everything from IQ, the traditional medical dogma is that median IQ for ADHD individuals is lower than average. That's not to say that there aren't high
747.
by mrangle 4y ago
Aperger's is both a different state, and in many contexts, a sub optimal state. In some limited contexts, it is a superior state. Its undeniable that a dominant part of both the human experience and survival depends on social interacti
748.
by mrangle 4y ago
I'm in a medical profession that delivers services to the autistic community. Never in our training did we learn that Fragile X is a cause of autism, let alone the primary cause. I've never delivered services to a client that had
749.
by mrangle 4y ago
You're over-reacting and trying to use your emotion as a bludgeon, in order to stand in for absent logic. You're also falling into a semantic illusion that everything currently or formerly classified as autism is actually all on t
750.
by mrangle 4y ago
It isn't arbitrary. Asperger's and HFA are not the same. One is language impaired and one isn't, as the bare minimum clinical difference. That being said, I don't doubt that the history of differential diagnosis is marke

More ›