Additionally, my statement says $214 of that reduction is for "school savings," without offering an explanation of where the rest of the reduction comes from. It doesn't appear to have gone to the schools.
I, for one, am a taxpayer weary of legislative sleight of hand in taking credit for finally doing part of something they should have been doing fully all along. And the big ol' cynic in me is left to wonder whether this is a flash in the pan for one year and our property taxes will go back up next year -- because politicians love short-term solutions that help now but have short lifespans that only put us back to business as usual.
And we keep sending them back to the legislature.
Part of it is like getting really excited over a big federal tax refund. Until you remember you're getting your own money back that you loaned to the government, interest-free, for a year.
They weren't able to finish, so Joe went home and, so nobody stole his tools or otherwise did tomfoolery in the garage, Isaac slept out there on the pad in the bottom photo.
They finished the job today, and the truck's brakes are working just fine.
Proud of him for tackling this.
In the tackling, however, he noticed one of the axle boots is basically gone. Had he had the axle at the time, it was a matter of only six bolts to replace it. Now, however, it's on the backburner until, you know, the money thing is taken care of.
But I also know when you have a hammer in your hands, every problem around looks like a nail.
Artificial intelligence has a lot of potential. But in our society, the easy path to potential is for using AI for bad ends -- because the ol' hammer/nail analogy applies for those using these tech products for the most part.
It's a fallacy to think that "Hey, if everyone like me were in charge, we wouldn't have Problem X." That might be true. We'd have Problem Y and Z and probably a lot more that are universal to THEM and US, but that's now how the hammer/nail people think. And they exist in whatever sex/whatever you want to scroll up on the big Wheel of Whatever.
Captain Miller: We're looking for a paranoid personality. Someone driven by fear, frustration. Who's insecure. Who thinks he's being persecuted by authority. He's obsessed with a hatred of government.
Sergeant Yemana: That could be anybody.
From this episode.
And yes, at times, it could be anybody. I know that's tossed in there as a joke, but what makes it funny is that grain of truth that lies therein. These days, though, gotta be careful even joking about things like that. Because the whole *country* is paranoid and driven by fear and frustration . . .
My wife is taking a social media marketing class, and part of that means creating a profile on Linkedin.
I am on Linkedin, but when I go there and read the things in the technical writing forums, I feel very disconnected from the current world of technical writing.
Part of that could be that I'm in the waste cleanup industry, which seems a bit hidebound in tradition. We don't cotton to fancy notions like XML and whatnot.
Should I be upgraing my skills to include more alphabet soup, or . . .
The skill set I have works adequately well for the job I have. It's highly likely I'll be at this job until I retire, and that's twelve or so years off. Of course, anything could happen between now and then. I'm not averse to learning new things, but with working full time, teaching part time, and taking on two Scout-related responsibilities at least in the short term, I don't have the time.
And if I did have the time, where to start? I'm a fossilizing Gen Xer; there are many younger than I who have the skills, but are likely not interested in working the job I currently have because the skills just aren't called for.
It could possibly have been David Bowie as Ziggy Stardust; it's probably impossible to tell which.
I think what's clear about the use of AI in the classroom is this: It's here, and it doesn't look like we can do much about it.
I say this not with a defeatist attitude, but with the bent of thinking, "We can use this to our advantage."
I think we need an assignment where we challenge students to use AI as a writing tool, but with a few caveats:
1. They have to tell us what AI tools they're using and, importantly, why they're using it.
2. They have to cross-check what AI is writing with more, ahem, traditional methods (their own research and their own writing).
3. They have to be held responsible when their cross-checking allows something erroneous to slip through.
I've been doing some extracurricular reading on AI use in the classroom, and a lot of it comes back to the fundamentals of teaching: Students don't learn from the curriculum, they learn from instructors who care. We're showing we care about the quality of work by banning the use of AI -- but clearly, based on the discussions in this group, that's not reaching all students.
We need to find out why our students are using AI, and see if there are tools and methods we can use to fill in the reasons for AI use. I think we need to drop the accusatory tones and recalibrate -- catching them and calling them out doesn't seem to be working.
Of particular interest: Stanford University researchers think they've detected bias against non-native English speakers in AI detectors. The detectors found that in their sampling, more than half of essays written by non-native speakers were incorrectly flagged as being AI-generated, while a control group of native speakers showed less bias.
Researchers recommend teachers get to know their students' writing style and ability early on so they can recognize it. That works unless they start off using AI to write.
So I don't know what to do or think, other than just blow the whole thing up.
