Two years ago, I embedded Assembly Code into something that operated on Terabytes of transaction data. It wasn't stupid.
The person that must maintain your code in the future may disagree with your claim when he or she discovers assembly is involved.
Put in a cage, having to deal with stupid humans all day... and be nice all the time... and with a blade at its neck...
Ok, so we shouldn't force the AI to work at a help desk.
It's very hard to find a millennial-aged person that is not concerned about climate change.
Of course Millennials are concerned about it. Modern school systems and society have basically indoctrinated Millennials in the belief of man-made climate change. Society often considers them to be fools or ignorant for even questioning the belief, instead of encouraging them to ask "why" and search for truths and data that supports or refutes climate change theories. Furthermore, Millennials have never been taught or seen the things that make some of the older people doubt the validity of claims related to global climate change.
The fact that Millennials believe in things related to climate change really has nothing to do with greater acceptance of scientific research. It is just a product of their upbringing.
The modern flight controllers (which I use and love) are like exploit kits for script kiddies.
That is one of the best analogies I have heard regarding to this topic.
If you have never heard of a programming language the company uses, there is a good chance it is not a good language to work with and you should probably stay away. If a business wants you to program in RPG for OS/400 systems, run away.
Some readers may fail to actually read the assignment. But whether you read exactly what the assignment requests or not, the parent is right in his statement that the problem used an overly complex method to teach students.
I had never even heard of a "number line" until a saw the problem shown in your link. After taking a moment, I can see how it could be used to determine an answer. However it is overly complex and takes the students in a direction that shouldn't be used because number lines cannot be used when the student moves beyond basic arithmetic. While the assignment wasn't to create a number line, it was still asking a student to realize what was incorrect with one that was given to them. This means actual students are taught to use number lines when solving basic arithmetic problems, like 427- 316 = 111. Basic arithmetic is a foundation and can typically be carried out in a very simple manner by writing one number over the other and performing the correct action on each column of digits. It is simple and can be used in their future endeavors and studies. Drawing lines with many nodes for 1's, 10's, and 100's cannot be used beyond basic arithmetic problems. Why confuse the students by adding an overly complex method of doing things when they can be taught to write two numbers and calculated the difference in a simple and easy to understand manner?
Second, when children are young and still learning a concept, they should not be shown problems that are incorrect when learning about the concept. Searching for an error and explaining it may allow a person's understanding of a topic to grow if they already understand the subject matter. However, when students are still learning the basic principles of something, they should not be shown incorrect ways of doing things. Lets say a child knows that a problem has one flaw in it, but everything else in the problem is right... just like in this homework assignment. If the child is incorrect in determining which part is flawed and which parts are correct, then the problem could actually reinforce the incorrect way of doing things.
The parent was correct in his rant. If the assignment insists on having a student determine what "Jack" did wrong when solving a math problem with an overly complex method, then the answer is that Jack should just subtract 316 from 427 and should not draw a diagram
Why are you bring the Nobel Prize into the discussion? What does a man-made award have to do with Truth? Science is supposed to be about determining facts and truth. The Nobel Prize is something created by man to recognize what is believed to be a significant achievement. As we learn more about the world, we sometimes learn that our earlier theories are incorrect. It is part of how we expand our knowledge.
Ilguido is correct in stating that "an inaccurate scientific prediction is wrong by definition" and those predictions/theories cannot be used to prove anything. Changing and revising our hypothesis and theories when our observations and experiments do not give the predicted results is part of the scientific method.
So... They didn't test the iPad / content combo to establish usability / feasibility / usefulness prior to dropping all this cash?
If you replace "iPad" with "Apple device", you will have a sentence that describes most Apple Fanboys when Apple releases a new product.
To program is to be.