Look another stinky turd fapping over vulgar content posted by your buddy

Gg no re

Problem is it will eventually reach this as well.

I find this kind of stuff funny but more sad really. These people are making these changes purely out of political reasons without much regard of actual impact.

I recently started a job in a very quantitatively focused field. Like 3/4 of people I talk over email daily have a CFA. Like 3/4 of them are either Chinese/Indian or Russian ethnicity. We literally have no black/Hispanic people in my local office of around 60 people.

We're creating a weak and entitled society that's destined to be 2nd tier to some of these other ones. People talk about how China will overtake us as the world superpower. It won't happen through military conquest, it'll just happen because of lack of human capital. Eastern culture celebrates rigor and discipline while here we bend over backwards to make sure there's equality of outcome. This is usually done by lowering requirements to move on to the next educational level.

So far it's fine because our cost of living is nice enough to lure talent from other place to the US/Canada but that won't always be the case.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jul 12 2021 02:13pm

I think the education standard baseline in most public schools is pathetic. One reason the US is suffering.
Both in straight Math/English/History etc.
Also trades schools are disappearing along with apprenticeships.
You either are a HS flunky, or a basket weaving PHD.

Interpreting basic data in a historic or sociological context should be taught in their respective classes, not math ones. Math classes should teach the cold, hard, ideologically neutral math and nothing else.
In the 9th grade, which is what we're talking about here, we can be glad if all students have fully grasped dealing with percentages and understand, on a mathematical level, what "13%" actually means.

/thread

Also, I think we need to increase our expectations with mathematics. If you're not doing Algebra 2 by 9th grade (matrices, higher order polynomial functions, etc.) then you're going to be woefully unprepared for the real world IMO.

Agreed, but the inconvenient truth is that a LOT of people do not have the IQ/talent to reach the levels of mathematical prowess required by many of the high-skill jobs of the future. What wrote about human capital becoming the bottleneck is totally true, even if the West doesn't shoot itself in the foot by lowering standards and expectations.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 12 2021 05:02pm

I fundamentally disagree. Kids need to be challenged more from a young age and pushed harder in math and sciences. Children willl rise to the tasks you give them if you support them and give them the resources to do so. Unfortunately, we've prioritized corporate profits over healthy development, so we now have two parents working who don't have time to help their kids with their homework, and we've made college massively expensive which restricts access.

If we really invested in our kids education as a society, we could easily turn 90% of them into highly competent quantative workers. But we don't want that, mostly because we've prioritized businesses over family and well being.

In the not so distant future, the types of quantitative tasks that can be executed by a person with an IQ of 105 (perhaps even 110) or lower can also be carried out by AI/machine learning. These tasks are not where the wealth and power of the future are generated, the key stuff will be happening significantly higher up the scientific/mathematical totem pole.

I totally agree with you that we should push children harder and invest more in their education, so that their potential can be exhausted as fully as possible. And yes, this includes investing into better didactics and looking at potential social or cultural factors for the black, hispanic (and to some degree also white) underperformance in math/science. I just completely disagree with the notion that CRT will help with any of that, nor do I think that any of these efforts will fundamentally solve the aforementioned human capital bottleneck.

The more I learn about AI the more I'm seeing its limits. I think most people vastly overestimate how much use AI is going to get in the future. It's going to be very useful for quickly analyzing large data sets and aiding humans in specific tasks, but it's just not going to be practical for most data collection and analysis. Like, one of the labs that works right next to us makes extensive use of AI for their bioinformatics research already. It's great when they are doing single-cell analysis, like analyzing millions of RNA molecules taken from a single cell, but in the end having a person at the bench analyzing the quality of the cell culture as they carry it out and doing the experiments isn't going to go away for a very long time.

Also, AI requires ridiculous data sets to train on. Like, absolutely massive in some cases if you want to get good results. Until we have the entire planet covered in servers we aren't going to have AIs collecting training sets for other AIs, and collecting training sets for these applications will require humans who can carry out those kinds of tasks.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jul 12 2021 05:57pm