Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This is a teenager

pudding.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 868 posts

Re: This is a teenager

#751

Post by [deleted] »

gowld wrote: post #396
bumby wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most think resources should be targeted towards groups that "deserve it more" because they are "worse off" I believe there is behavioral game theory research that shows we are hard-wired for "fairness", even at the expense of a more optimal solution. E.g., Two subjects are given $100 to split and one was allowed to determine the split and the other the choice to accept it or both would go with nothing. A "$90/$10"…

We're hard-wired for fairness toward ourselves than to others. That's why $90/$10 splits exist, but $10/$9 splits don't.

[deleted]

Re: This is a teenager

#752

Post by trogdor »

kulahan wrote: post #421
subpixel wrote: post #6

Positive relationships with adults is shown to be means of counteracting adverse childhood experiences. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8237477/ I volunteer in a local school. It's not always fun, but something has to change.

How do you volunteer at the local school? My wife and I are both passionate about and interested in improving children’s lives, but not super sure how best to do it outside of donations and big brother big sister-type programs. As an aside, maybe it’s because I’m inexperienced, but I’m finding it surprisingly hard to get connected with a group to help people that isn’t a highly specific cause like religion, LGBTQ, ch…

>I’m finding it surprisingly hard to get connected with a group to help people that isn’t a highly specific cause like religion, LGBTQ, children of certain races, etc.

I recently started volunteering at my county’s animal shelter. The experience has been very rewarding.

Re: This is a teenager

#753

Post by galdosdi »

tatrajim wrote: post #646
llm_trw wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schools in the US cost more than schools in any other developed nation. Every institution in the US has been taken over by careerists and credentialists who produce nothing of value and are a drain on the system. For a simple example in our area look at twitter: we were told the servers would catch fire, the end times will be upon us and cats will live with dogs. Instead the servers kept chugging along just as well a…

As an anecdote on the topic of education, as a US Peace Corps Volunteer in rural South Korea in the 1970s, I routinely visited secondary schools that (at the time) were little more than drab warehouses for large (-70 students/class) using ragged textbooks and ancient furniture. Spirits were high, though, and these farm kids were successfully learning math through basic differential calculus plus a daunting array of o…

A quote I once heard applies here. "All a preacher needs is 4 walls and the good book, and willing souls"

For most of school, all you need is paper and pens and a place where to meet. A notebook costs a dollar. You can also do quite a bit of lab science prior to college at home, and music only adds the cost of the instrument.

I have done tutoring in parks and coffee shops and in some of those sessions seen more learning than the most expensive classroom.

It's about the kids and the teachers, not the campus.

If you want a really really good school at a really low price, eliminate the building and all support functions other than hiring new teachers, and redirect all of the extra money to teachers salaries. Then just meet in libraries, parks, coffee shops, and the houses of parents and teachers.

99% of the outcome comes from the teachers (being competent) and the students (being motivated).

Re: This is a teenager

#754

Post by acjohnson55 »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #647
acjohnson55 wrote: post #637

The format is very creative and technically impressive. I don't want to launch into criticisms without acknowledging that. However, I find myself underwhelmed, for a few reasons. - It's hard to compare the different cohorts, because of the different widths. - The definition of "adverse experiences" seems too limited in scope of what's counted, leading to small numbers and small differentiation between the cohorts. -…

I'm honestly not sure what conclusion to come away from this data with. It seems to be bolstering a (typically conservative) viewpoint that parenting is really important and that bad or unfit parents need to be kept in check by the state because the harm they may do to their kids can last a lifetime. This article focuses on shootings, neglectful parents, etc. But what if we focused on more controversial things like o…

I don't think it's at all unique to conservatives to believe that parenting is important. I would say conservatives tend to want to enforce (and sometimes preferentially support) "traditional" households, leaving up to people to self organize their support systems. Liiberals tend to want to accept households as they are but put in place systems to compensate for the specific conditions that might be suboptimal in a child's environment.

I'm biased, but I believe the liberal perspective takes a more open mind to letting people live the ways they want, under the assumption that this is likely to be locally optimal versus trying to coerce people into externally imposed lifestyles. I don't think it's controversial to say that two parent households correlate with better outcomes. But that doesn't mean that every family is better off that way. Some children are way better off if it's easy and unstigmatized for a single parent to get sole custody if the other parent is abusive.

Re: This is a teenager

#755

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

brabel wrote: post #724
dumbo-octopus wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is not the claim. That is a simple statistical fact that is obvious to anyone who looks at the data. The claim is that folks are nothing more than "a derivation of their previous person states", and that correspondingly there is little to nothing a person can choose to do to escape the path set for them by their start state. I personally think this is blatantly false, and I have many observations to support…

> folks are nothing more than "a derivation of their previous person states" FFS that's an unbelievably bad interpretation. Are you just trolling or you really can't see the difference between that interpretation and "what we become depends in great part on where we're starting from"??

My feeling is that dumbo-octopus wants to fight somebody who believes that we have no agency and that socioeconomic conditions entirely determine our future, but it's not working because there's nobody like that nearby.

Re: This is a teenager

#756

Post by subpixel »

kulahan wrote: post #421
subpixel wrote: post #6

Positive relationships with adults is shown to be means of counteracting adverse childhood experiences. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8237477/ I volunteer in a local school. It's not always fun, but something has to change.

How do you volunteer at the local school? My wife and I are both passionate about and interested in improving children’s lives, but not super sure how best to do it outside of donations and big brother big sister-type programs. As an aside, maybe it’s because I’m inexperienced, but I’m finding it surprisingly hard to get connected with a group to help people that isn’t a highly specific cause like religion, LGBTQ, ch…

Where I live the superintendent and local groups formed a task-force style intervention and looped in local volunteers.

The scale of the problem is most visible through 'special ed' allocation. Once a program for kids with learning challenges, it now also encompasses what are essentially behavioral problems.

Kids don't get kicked out of school for throwing raging tantrums or hitting teachers - they get placed into programs designed to keep them in school. (If that's what life is like at school, imagine what life is like at home.)

Re: This is a teenager

#757

Post by James_K »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #727
James_K wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Police do not protect the victim of murder But if they could, they most certainly should. Preventing murder is good, just as preventing a bad childhood is good. > Your view appears to say "society" (the police?) The police are (or should be) an extension of society. They are a part of the government, which in a democracy means the represent the will of the people, and hence they are society manifest. There are othe…

Government has the responsibility to provide access to education and make it as transient as possible in regards to class. But government by experience is usually also a bad legal guardian, even if the people involved really want to help these kids. Perhaps they get lucky and grow up in a good adoptive family. But for the others there are a few things that are quite difficult to replace. A democracy isn't a manifeste…

> So perhaps you need not only look at the children and instead try to improve the lives of the parents as well.

Clearly. It was other people who started suggesting that the children of poor parents should be forcibly put up for adoption. I can't fathom why anyone would think this is a good idea or even worth talking about.

Re: This is a teenager

#758

Post by trogdor »

Clubber wrote: post #283
pants2 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a family member that is severely disabled. She used to be on a program where the government would supplement her wages - she worked at Jack in the Box, where her employer would pay like $3/hr and the government would top that up to $10/hr. Now that program is gone and minimum wage for fast food is $20/hr. She simply cannot perform $20/hr worth of work, so she's unemployed (and living on government assistance).…

There's usually carveouts for people with certain disabilities. It allows companies to pay them below the minimum wage. I would be surprised if that was abolished with the increase in minimum wage.

It’s a federal law, and it still exists.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/39-14c-subminim...

Re: This is a teenager

#759

Post by raxxorraxor »

James_K wrote: post #757
raxxorraxor wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government has the responsibility to provide access to education and make it as transient as possible in regards to class. But government by experience is usually also a bad legal guardian, even if the people involved really want to help these kids. Perhaps they get lucky and grow up in a good adoptive family. But for the others there are a few things that are quite difficult to replace. A democracy isn't a manifeste…

> So perhaps you need not only look at the children and instead try to improve the lives of the parents as well. Clearly. It was other people who started suggesting that the children of poor parents should be forcibly put up for adoption. I can't fathom why anyone would think this is a good idea or even worth talking about.

Ah, sorry, then I misunderstood your point. I though you were suggesting that it would be a productive thing to do. Empirical evidence of the past would suggest otherwise and I believe government only ever has legitimacy to remove children from their home when they are in acute and tangible danger.

Nothing that should be decided by some sensibilities du jour.

Re: This is a teenager

#760

Post by [deleted] »

brabel wrote: post #724
dumbo-octopus wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is not the claim. That is a simple statistical fact that is obvious to anyone who looks at the data. The claim is that folks are nothing more than "a derivation of their previous person states", and that correspondingly there is little to nothing a person can choose to do to escape the path set for them by their start state. I personally think this is blatantly false, and I have many observations to support…

> folks are nothing more than "a derivation of their previous person states" FFS that's an unbelievably bad interpretation. Are you just trolling or you really can't see the difference between that interpretation and "what we become depends in great part on where we're starting from"??

[deleted]
Post reply on HN