RoR: Forum

Post 0

Monday, February 19, 2007 - 4:29pm

Link

Edit

Bill Gate's take:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2002191433_gates27m.html

Bill think's government can fix it with more money. *Gag*

Post 1

Monday, February 19, 2007 - 5:38pm

Link

Edit

It sounds like Gates has some of those Windows "features" in his brain!

Post 2

Monday, February 19, 2007 - 7:24pm

Link

Edit

You never lose money underestimating people.

Bill Gates was wildly successful at providing an operating system he bought (not wrote) for IBM compatible computers in the days when "you can't get fired for recommending IBM." It was corporatism. Well, that's a market, too. As County Joe said, "there's money, good money, to be made / supplying the army with the tools of trade." We don't like to admit that. I can defend Bill Gates's right to his billions, but I don't have to like how he earned it. Myself, I admit, I'm on a PC -- but that's because I am an old command line guy: CP/M, TRS-DOS, RSTS/11 and VAX/VMS. But I recognize the Apple as a superior platform and I identify the reasons why.

The key thing about market capitalism is that though some teachers will be mad enough at Steve Jobs to not buy his computers, other computer users who disagree with him will still buy Apple because they don't give a rip about Jobs and only want the best machine for the money, according to their (subjective) value judgments.

Post 3

Monday, February 19, 2007 - 11:36pm

Link

Edit

I think Jobs said what he said because he sincerely cares about the future of this nation. He also understands how little impact the school system had on the entire "tech revolution." It was lead by many people who completely despised their organized education. These people succeeded in spite of their schooling, not because of it. This is the case with most successful Americans.

Post 4

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - 3:50pm

Link

Edit

Ok, the Gates article angers me.

""The key problem is political will," he said, discussing resistance to change. He said it was "morally wrong" to offer more advanced levels of coursework to high-income students compared with that offered many minority and low-income scholars. And he trumpeted the goal of preparing every high-school student for either two- or four-year college programs."

So the best solution is to make all schools as good as our worst school? Or to just collect and spend enough money in order to offer the best services to all schools? Or some muddy place in between, so long as all are equal?

The "key problem", I would say, is philosophy. I think any young student with the right attitude can make a great education for themselves with minimal resources. If we spend enough money, do we change the student's philosophy? I doubt it.

Post 5

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - 9:14pm

Link

Edit

That was a poorly worded newspaper article.

Gates has been trying to force the schools to offer advanced course work at all schools for all students. And to raise the quality of the course work and the standards in general.

If Gates were an Objectivist he would recognize that what is needed is to privatize education - but he isn't and he is trying to work with what exists. He put his money where his mouth is (over $2 billion) and is trying to make a difference where it is needed. His foundation is responsible for 14,000 scholarships and has already had a major impact on the number of high school grads that go on to college in those schools they are working with.

I can't see any reason to knock him for it.

Here is a link to what he is trying to do in education:
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/UnitedStates/Education/