Agreed, it's insane to me that in an era of Google Colab (et al) schools still require students to shell out >$100 for one of these. I'm sure there is some backroom arrangement with schools of some kind.
A lack of functionality is the point. You don't want a full CAS or Internet search results available, or many students will just take the easy route and not learn anything.
Neither teachers nor school districts have the time or resources to audit every new tool someone wants to use, or to help students figure out how to use their preferred tool to do something - find something that works and just use that
I had a cheap Casio fx calculator. It got me all the way through my exams in school and university. I had Mathematica at home.
While I can see that being very good on a TI-84 would help you complete exams faster and get better marks, is that a skill that we want students to learn? Being good on a fancy calculator is essentially useless in real life. In real life people use computers not fancy calculators.
IMO it's better to either allow only basic calculators, or to allow real mathematics software.
The ability to quickly graph functions and see them visually is an enormous aid to learning. Similarly, for various topics like statistics the ability to operate on a dataset is beneficial. Doing all of the raw arithmetic that goes into Chi Squared or whatever isn't particularly important for statistical analysis, and being able to get to the important bits faster is very beneficial.
Where to draw the line depends on the course. In general tools that "give the answer" for something where thinking provides insight are bad in education - for instance, a CAS which will simply compute derivatives isn't beneficial when taking Calculus. Things that eliminate grunt work not useful to that intuition - like computing the same formula 40 times to draw a graph by hand - are beneficial.
There’s no back room arrangement, beyond perhaps some amount of marketing from TI to math teachers. But nobody is getting a kickback to recommend the TI-84. Also, since so many people had to buy these things then stuck it in a drawer after a couple years, there’s a healthy supply of used ones on eBay and marketplace.
I noticed this phenomenon a few months ago. I often "chat" with blog post excerpts that use language or references I don't understand, and while I'm waiting for the model to finish thinking, I like to read the reasoning traces. Spontaneously, without doing a web search, and without me saying who the author was or even mentioning that I wanted to know who it was, the model would drop an off-hand mention to the identify the blog post author in its reasoning trace. I then started doing "pop quiz" questions to see if the model could recognize a paragraph or two from a blog post (always a very recent one, often the very same day it was published) and it would nail the author almost every single time. Works for a very wide range of bloggers even when they are writing "off their normal beat."
Indeed, I found this part extremely interesting. The more general vision of "testing a vintage model on something invented after its training data ended" seems like quite a strong test of "true cognition" (or training data contamination, if you haven't stopped up all the leakage...)
Elaborating a bit - brain is hard to study since you can't easily take a biopsy of it (from a living person at least), and various brain scans are not great at identifying the stuff we care about.
The slow acting nature of it means also you have to wait a long time to see results of clinical trials; also because early stages are easy to miss that also means you are stuck studying people who are already pretty senile and thus might be beyond the point where you can make a big difference.
Ruxandra has a nice piece, focused on cancer, but the reasoning is basically the same here: biology is just really hard. Sometimes we get lucky but in general it's a long, slow slog.
Pricing is based on customer value and restriction of customer options.
If we're paying $1000 for a Chinese phone that we'd pay $2000 for, we'll end up paying that price when the manufacturers have finally starved the professional capability to compete from the rest of the world. As we get closer to that point, the urgency to onshore is increasing.
Exploitation when we can get away with it is in our social nature as humans. So this isn't about the Chinese, or any other culture. It's just necessary for this to be onshored because it's critical.
> we'll end up paying that price when the manufacturers have finally starved the professional capability to compete from the rest of the world
What does this look like, in practice? Once China and India and Vietnam "starve the professional capability to compete" (presumably in the manufacture of smart phones) from the US, what would actually change and why?
This would be a world where the top talent and training capability for that talent lives there. Our universities would have deteriorated, our professional class at this top level would have died off or relocated over there. Probably an example I can think of is the once great textile industry of Britain that is now in Asia.
I can only speak to corporate use, but the most common issues I saw were battery life, charging port issues, and speaker failures, in that order. I managed about 1200 for about 2 years and I'd get 1-3 of those issues a week. I'd say 25% of the time it required a replacement. Average age 2.5 years.
That’s repairable for cheaper that buying a new one, isn’t it? Perhaps the rationale is that it’s cheaper because the resell price offset the repair price?
Yeah you get a few bucks back from recyclers or your carrier but also having to inventory phones and track them is a pain in the ass and requires staff to manage. Much easier to just toss it and send em a new one next day.
I share your pain. You might enjoy Plotnine for python, helps ease the pain. The only bad thing about ggplot is that once you learn it you start to hate every other plotting system. Iteration is so fast, and it is so easy to go from scrappy EDA plot to publication-quality plotting, it just blows everything else out of the water.
Depends a lot on the task demands. "Got 95% of the way to designing a successful drug" and "Got 100% of the way" is a huge difference in terms of value, and that small bump in intelligence would justify a few orders of magnitude more in cost.
But that objective measure is exactly what we’re lacking in programming: There is often many ways to skin a cat, but the model only takes one. Without knowing about those it didn’t take, how do you judge the quality of a new model?
I agree with you, but my gut tells me that a lot of people don’t know what a good outcome should/could look like and are accepting whatever it delivers.
Honestly that was the cherry on top for me -- the employee confident enough to just decide "this is my work computer, I need it to do work, I can't do work with my hands being irritated, so I will sand down the edge." Pure gold.
>Kinship societies are actively hostile to economic growth, because economic growth undermines the basis of kinship: that is why kinship societies demand constant, visible sacrifices of wealth—funerals being the most spectacular—that make it extraordinarily difficult for any individual to accumulate capital, reinvest their assets, and pull ahead. The funeral is a window into a system of wealth destruction that serves, above all else, to keep people poor
This reasoning is flawed. Consumer spending is not "wealth destruction" -- who makes the fantasy coffins? Who prints the banners? Local businesses!
Ghana is sitting at a 5.6% GDP growth rate; for reference developmental success India is at 6.5%. Ghana's GDP in 2000 was $5B, today it's $82.B. Its per-capita GDP has more than doubled in the same time period.
Thank you, TIL about the parable of the broken window.
I was thinking the same thing when reading the comments, surely that money would still benefit the economy if say it was invested in the education of a child, but it would also act as a economic multiplier as the child can now contribute more to the economy.
But I never knew there was a term for it.
Especially this line really highlights it:
> by the 2000s, many Ghanaian hospitals were earning more from storing dead bodies than from treating living patients.
Surely those resources are better spent healing the living.
> Consumer spending is not "wealth destruction" -- who makes the fantasy coffins? Who prints the banners? Local businesses!
If the local businesses were instead being hired to dig holes and fill them up again... oh wait, they literally are, except they're also instructed to make very elaborate artworks and put them in the holes before shoveling in the dirt. Anyway: Can you please examine the movement of real resources rather than pieces of paper? No society gets rich by making art which is immediately destroyed.
There's no good way to measure wealth creation. If people are getting what they want - if there's no extra government tax them to pay for the digging and re-filling of holes, but it's all done freely, out of desire to have it done - then it might be of some value, because they think it is.
We can say "but it plainly isn't purposeful", but the same applies to pets, vacations, every kind of art and craft, fancy cuisine, pure mathematics, dance music festivals, religion and all associated economic activity, all sports ... I'll stop there, but the two main points are: firstly, the value in life is about a lot more than moving real resources, or paper, or food and shelter; secondly, nobody knows what it is all about, man. It's hugely a matter of opinion, what's good and worthwhile. Economic activity is perhaps the ongoing process of making guesses about the answers.
It appears (from this article, I haven't done any exhaustive research) that when the Ghanaians have the option of hiding money from their families and from the funeral expenses, they exercise that option with flair and alacrity. That suggests that they are not getting what they want out of this whole digging activity. And while we cannot read off what is best in life from the stars or the mountains, we can have a look at what people do when they are free to choose without social pressure. It does rather appear that most humans who are free to choose would rather have washing machines and cars than elaborate funerals. Were it not so, then presumably the funerals of the West, wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice, would drastically outshine what the poverty-stricken Ghanaians can manage. Where are our burials IN SPACE? Our cremation rockets fired into the Sun, "from stardust you came, to stardust your return"? Why do we not hold weeks of elaborate mourning, with professional poets (or rappers if you prefer) hired to extol the virtues of the deceased and laws about "funeral leave" allowing us to sit idle?
It would be mean of me to link to the Wikipedia article "Space burial" at this point. I think you make some valid points, mainly in the first few sentences.
Ghana's GDP per capita is around $2000. It's only a success story because the baseline is so low, and because most of its neighbors are doing even worse.
Additionally, this is pretty much the paradigmatic case of that criticism frequently heard on the left in any other context, that GDP is not the same as quality of life. Indeed in this case it's apparently measuring the quality of death.
reply