Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rotoscoped's commentslogin

DE Shaw is a quant firm and tends to hire out of STEM fields, not arts like business.


Yes. I should have caught this.


That's not true. I have the experiences of having prepared taxes professionally and counting and reporting donations at a church. By combining those I can observe that the majority of donations are proportional to income, not whether the donator can fill out a Schedule A. (The ability to fill out a Schedule A and deduct donations essentially depends on whether the taxpayer has a mortgage, for middle class.)


I think the author of the article used it intentionally. The premise of the article is that sometimes developers find themselves having to or choosing to do a death march despite knowing it's unsustainable long-term, and there are ways to make the death march more productive and mitigate the negative effects.


I know a couple of Delphi developers; good developers. I don't think that they would recommend learning the language today because the number of legacy systems still in Delphi are declining, few new projects use Delphi, and while there are web frameworks, app development frameworks, etc., they really only exist to help existing developers and are not remarkable enough to be worth learning the language.


Germany has not had nearly the problems with homeschooling that you imagine. Its prosecution of homeschooling families has been appalling, though. Seizing children (at gunpoint) and forcing them to go to a public school against their parents' wishes, and not allowing the family to leave the country, is not healthy for the children, the parents, the classmates or the country.


I think it actually has a good reputation here. The people who seriously oppose it today either are committed to mandatory state education for political reasons or have not met many homeschoolers. Most of the hard political battles about the right to homeschool were won 20-30 years ago. Most public and private schools have programs or arrangements for homeschooling families that wish to take some classes or enroll in some extra-curricular programs, as do junior colleges, so even many professional educators have positive things to say about the method.


That is not true. Parents use quality textbooks and lesson plans. They also get together to pay specialists to teach difficult subjects one or more times per week. Also, by the time a homeschooled child is of the age that their subjects can only be taught by specialists, they either know how to teach themselves or take courses from local junior colleges or correspondence courses.

There is no one proper pedagogy. Teachers use a lot of different methods, as do parents, whether they have an education background, a science background, or are just using well-reviewed curricula.

The ability to give a child a customized, one-on-one education is an advantage over the classroom model. The parents have time because one parent does not work or does not work very much; they are a full-time educator and put in a lot of work to be good at it.

Regarding your earlier remark about abuse: abuse does not really happen. The safest place for a child is in a home with intact parents, and most homeschooling families are intact.

I mean this kindly when I say you are completely ignorant of what homeschooling is like. I encourage you to acquaint yourself with actual homeschoolers. There are probably several communities in your area and you would be invited to observe some of the co-operative activities and talk to the parents.


You point about abuse is incorrect. Abuse (physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, or neglect) is more likely to happen in the home, perpetrated by a family member.

I'm not sure why it's a reason to avoid home schooling. Schools are not great at spotting and reporting abuse.


I think that you misunderstood me. The majority of child abuse happens at home (~72,000 parents vs. ~58,000 known non-family [0]), but it happens in broken homes, second marriages, etc. Most homeschooling parents are together and in their first marriage, so they, just going by the statistics, aren't likely to abuse their children.

For a source on the uneven distribution of abuse by family members, I would suggest to start with this HHS report: [1]

"Children living with their married biological parents universally had the lowest rate, whereas those living with a single parent who had a cohabiting partner in the household had the highest rate in all maltreatment categories. Compared to children living with married biological parents, those whose single parent had a live-in partner had more than 8 times the rate of maltreatment overall, over 10 times the rate of abuse, and nearly 8 times the rate of neglect."

[0] http://www.nationalchildrensalliance.org/NCANationalStatisti...

[1] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_...


Thank you for the correction, especially for the detailed links.


No comment on Monsanto in particular, but it's frequently, but not exclusively, lobbying and regulatory capture that libertarians dislike about large corporations. This tends to especially be true when about a company that sells something that affects basic life (eating.)


The Napoleon of Notting Hill is a story about this.


This is a good idea. I would just like to be able to ask questions without using the camera, and to have a favorites list that would make it easier to email or text the URL to the question.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: