Is public school and “formal education” becoming obsolete?

With the ability to connect to databases over the internet in a tap, read digital text books, take free (or paid) M.O.O.C.s, A.K.A. “massive open online courses”, and varieties of information being more and more accessible to anyone, anywhere, at virtually any time, is it crazy to think the “traditional” way of learning is in need of a renovation? It may have been once necessary to take your kids to school … before they could access information, take tests, study, learn, exchange information, watch videos, communicate and visualize, and get hands on learning … all from their tablet in their bedroom. And we are certainly not even tapping into the system of schools, boards, approaches to teaching/learning, administrations, biases, and curriculums set forth by these very institutions. There is also the idea of whether or not schools are encapsulating kids’ ideas, thoughts, feelings, and understandings within the idea of a “learning system” they work around, thus, closing their minds a bit. Learning freely from a system means you can be free to have the most open mind as you wish, and that no curriculum or board will try and teach you based on whatever standards they have in place – some being extremely outdated.

There’s also limitations, no doubt. When you go to school you probably have a range of subjects, but not whichever ones you may want. Sadly, you can’t learn a subject that’s not part of their system and use it solely to your approach in learning there. In other words, if the school doesn’t teach music, learning music at the school is not feasible – and trying to apply your music learning there is not credential. This is a severe limitation to your ability to succeed doing what YOU want, which is the opposite of succeeding doing what is predetermined for you by the learning institution.

Let’s not forget that little fact that everybody learns somewhat different; nobody can learn everything one specific way. Schools, for the most part, and teachers specifically do not have the desire, capability, or time/resources to teach things in different ways, even slightly. This is where the problem arises … kids fall back because everyone can’t do everything one way. It is also not feasible for this, even from the best of teachers. This is why the approach to group-schooling (learning all in one crowded room with bored kids, uninterested kids, etc.) is a dead-end. Institutionalized learning can never work for everyone, and it’s simply not right to use the motto, “No child left behind.” when your very system and approach is part of the reason you are left behind. You are not supposed to be a student of an institution … you are supposed to be a student of life; living and learning; not the product of an outdated system.

Why “video game consoles” are coming to an end

It may come as a surprise to many, but people think of video game consoles are separate devices to their “normal” computers that they use: smartphones, tablets, desktops, etc. Whatever you may wish to encapsulate it as, a video game console is nothing short of a computer just like your smartphone, desktop, microwave, and even any traffic light you probably have seen. These days video game consoles are becoming more and more integrated with the idea of the traditional “computer”: the “PC” term. While PC had its use back in the old days of IBM, calling your desktop “PC” and your PS4 otherwise is plain wrong. Alternatively, calling anything non-Windows desktop form factor as other than “PC” is also wrong.

People often differentiate between Windows and OS X as “PC” and “Mac”, but OS X and Windows both run on Intel processors; so it’s hard to say why OS X is not considered a “personal computer”, especially when it runs on the same microprocessor that Windows does. The same thing goes for modern video game consoles … both PS4 and Xbox One run on the “PC” as many would consider an Intel IA-32 or x84-64 computer architecture or instruction set architecture. In simpler terms, PS4 runs on pretty much the exact same thing as your Windows desktop, OS X, or Linux does on the bare metal of the computing platform. It makes no sense to waste money and efforts trying to still divert the idea of “video game console” away from any other computing platform in which games can run (which could be any platform from an old NES 6502 chip to an i7 Haswell @ 5.5 gigahertz clock speed).

It’s the time that “video game consoles” are coming to an end, and how long they ride out depends on how much more misinformation the marketers of video games and engineers want, and how long they want this seemingly real “video game platform” to exist. The marketing doesn’t fail because most consumers typically don’t know that a PS4 and a desktop can execute the same machine instructions … or that their Windows Surface tablet can play Wii and PS2 games on it through something called emulation.

What this does is give people the wrong impression of what a computer is and fails to teach them. People will think their magical video game boxes are unique, and they’ll spend $1,000.00 U.S.D. on them to watch Blu-ray movies and play the latest *describe console name here* games; or, as some would better manage, continue to build specially dedicated computers for games that have differing computer architectures. But manufacturers won’t do that because it costs too much money to manufacture specialized chips, make new ones, new hardware, etc. What do they do instead? They add a few compute units to an AMD graphics processor, slap on a cool name, lock down an Intel chip, optimize a specialized motherboard and call it all a PS4 … the deception of it all is that consumers think a PS4 is different than any other computer hardware because it has an “awesome graphical interface” which a 2012 rig could easily have had as well.

In the older days game consoles actually DID have their own more “independent” hardware and computing platforms … PS2 is one that implements MIPS and did so until PS3. The PS3 itself is pretty much a “computing platform” of its own in the sense that you can’t just simply slap together and buy its hardware like you could a PS4/Xbox One for less money than the system costs itself. You won’t run PS4/Xbox One games on it in general, but that’s besides the point … as long as people are uneducated, big companies make money by selling you a mushed together piece of hardware with a nice software-interface to run their games on it.

They won’t be along to continue down this path too much longer before people realize that a “video game console” and a “computer” is really all the same thing; and it’s stupid to slap together crap hardware and an interface to charge you more money as if it was “uniquely manufactured just for consumers”.

Why the “outernet” won’t do us much

The outernet is going to be a watered down, free version of the internet available to anyone. It will be Wi-Fi based, and it will most certainly suck. The reasons? It will be highly-limited to just Wikipedia and news information for the most part … with some possible media outlets for entertainment such as movies and music … but that’s about it. You won’t be getting truly free internet access … you will be getting toned down access to limited servers over a network. There should be no restraints on what someone is capable of looking for or accessing from a computer network … so the outernet will not give us true freedom. They will apparently be working with N.A.S.A. as well … let’s see where this goes.

OuterNetIntro[1]

What we can gather and likely assure from this is that:

1.the outernet will not be anything comparable to the internet;
2.you will not have full-access to anything, and will use services provided and limited;
3.you will not have freedom.

The outernet will not be the promised land of computer and network freedom.

Why are people so crazed over guns, gun ownership, and gun control laws?

Another thing that’s noticeable in places, specifically the U.S., is how crazed people are over “gun rights”, “gun control laws”, etc. I personally don’t get it … why do so many people want to own guns for? Just because you have a right to? Well, I would like to own a shark in my house … but I can’t, can I? I would like to live in a 100-story home … but I can’t due to grounding laws. The problem isn’t so much on the grounds of who should own guns, but why so many people feel they must express their freedom by owning deadly firearms. Since when and how does owning a gun make you or anyone a person exercising their free rights? People don’t need guns for self-protection, and whether or not people will use them for good or bad doesn’t explain what the fuss is over having them in the first place. Why not other weapons, like cannons, grenade and missile launchers? Is that a weak argument, you feel?

GunrightsCriminalsAgree[1]

I guess having a gun does make it easier … to defend your life by having the power to easily take another’s life away. Of course you could always defend your life without a firearm, but I guess that’s beyond some.

It’s just as strong as anyone arguing that they “need a gun in their possession to be free, because a piece of paper says I have that right.” The same piece of paper that says you have “freedom”, but punishes nearly anyone for saying the wrong thing, looking suspicious, etc.? And people are worried strictly because there’s gun control? There’s plenty more things people should be worrying about than having a right to own a damn firearm because of “freedom.” How about freedom that gives people their rights back, and their ability to ACTUALLY have real freedom? Limited freedom is not real freedom yet the concern people have is over the fact that they aren’t let to own deadly firearms … yep. I guess we know that “the people” certainly complain over important things.

Is Bethany Mota a smoker and a liar?

Bethany Mota is a famous young girl who has some secrets apparently. Bethany Mota, a YouTube fashionista who grew popular from hauling videos, clearly isn’t seen or heard of to be a smoker … that’s the thing. Do any of Bethany Mota’s fans know that she does/did smoke? Does Bethany Mota smoke? What about her real age? Some research shows something is certainly off about her information, especially in these pictures:

bmsmokes

Bmpicpro

Clearly this isn’t what people would imagine from such a squeaky clean image she has, that she’d be inhaling in tobacco products or worse and act as if she’s pure and beautiful.

p3bm

Also, according to the young star’s OkCupid profile she’s 19 … she must’ve got her birthday wrong? Her Wikipedia states that she should still be 18, as far in as to June of 2014:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethany_Mota

Why would her Wikipedia say she’s 18 and take her date from a reliable source, but her own profile on OkCupid that she made herself states she’s 19? Is her birthday really wrong and who got it wrong?

There’s also that other … er … thing about her saying she’s a smoker. Well, she wrote that she’s trying to quit, but that means she smokes regardless. It comes as a surprise because she never mentions it in her videos … or the fact that she likes Super Smash Bros. either:

proof4

So either everyone knows Bethany Mota smokes, puffs the magic dragon of formaldehyde and doesn’t talk about it, and her birthday is wrong … or something is wrong with her information and people don’t know these things about her. Perhaps she’s hiding the fact that she smokes from her fans to not be a bad influence? Maybe she’s really a little older and gave false info saying she’s younger? Who knows.

But it looks with like Bethany Mota’s smoker/smoking habits … she may need some “Mota-vation” herself.