Not sure if it’s biased, it’s a serious limitation of the technology. Some countries are already struggling with their energy grid and water demands as is.
I think it’s fair to ensure that you create something that isn’t subject to possible quotas in the future
It’s not about the quality of the tool but the fact that regulators will most likely think that this merger will violate anti-trust laws and lawyers from both companies can’t argue for why this isn’t the case
Weird. Mine doesn't, and it's been 8 days since that post. I even checked for updates, and I'm up to date. Maybe they reverted their bone head move? (I don't use it daily)
It varies by discipline, but IIRC for most degrees there was no significant correlation between the previous achievements of the student and their eventual degree grade, suggesting that actually it doesn't really matter for most degrees. Or at least that if it matters it's outweighed by other factors you're not mesuring via prior attainment.
So in that case within reason the output is independent of input, and the decision of who to admit to limited places is a matter of larger societal policy. Admittance on "merit" in this case would actually be bullshit in effect.
My employer is also the institution where I got my degree many years ago (I like this city and after coming here I never left) when they taught me, the requirement for Computer Science was 24 points, with Maths. Today the requirement is at least 3 As, one in Maths (which is approximately 30 points by the old system). Do they need better students? No. They need fewer students, they are over-subscribed, and higher requirements deter applicants and some will miss the higher requirement, meaning they teach maybe 500 students (in my day it'd be maybe 80). They still can't find big enough lecture theatres, next year's course will require overflow video relays. As I said, there's no correlation, but the goal isn't to find "the best" it's to reduce the sheer numbers without expensive in-person interviews of every candidate.
The result isn't better graduates, it's about the same, because you could teach (within reason) anyone. Some populations might lead to more pastoral problems†, but the degree to which excellent pastoral care is delivered is independent of actual teaching.
† Somebody's dog dies, they're distraught, don't go to class for a few weeks because they're so upset, next thing they know it's exams and they don't know anything. It doesn't have to be their dog dying, it can be mum got cancer, the family home burned down, their home country has a civil war, or even just the guy next door plays loud music 24/7 and they can't sleep properly. Non-academic stuff happens, you can wipe out somebody's potential by not addressing it.
I'm very glad that others are observing this as well. My last DEV post was literally the question of where I should hang out with possible future content to discuss on a more intermediate level.
It's great that beginners can start by diving into DEV but at some point you're just not a beginner anymore but because of all the noise your only option is to move on. Even if you put your 'experience level' to expert the relevant content shown in the DEV feed is for beginners. I think 'fostering a community for experienced developers' is really the only way for DEV if it wants to move beyond beginners.
Honest question from someone from the Netherlands: when are kids in the states old enough for these topics?
Me and all of my friends were thaught the fundamentals of algebra & trigonomatry (admittedly not calculus) at 13 years old. I had no idea the wasn't the case in the US and it honestly kind of blows my mind.
In some US public schools, the "advanced math" curriculum puts 7th graders in algebra. In more, though, algebra isn't available until 8th grade (and that is still treated as accelerated). "Normal" math progression has standardized on algebra as the first high school course, followed by geometry, then trig, then precalculus/analysis.
The first level of math acceleration moves that high school progression up a year and has seniors taking calc 1 (limits/derivates & single variable integrals. The second level of acceleration has calc 1 in 11th grade and calc 2 (multi-variable) in 12th grade.
There are a handful of schools, mostly private, that move faster or have more diverse math curriculum offerings, but this is the most common.
The norm for exposure to basic algebra is 5th (10-11 years old) grade in most US states. Not sure what the standards are exactly, but each grade after that does progressively more, with 14 year olds expected to complete a full year course.
My school was rural and that is way more advanced than mine was.
8: Algebra I
9: Algebra II
10: Geometry
11: Trigonometry
12: Pre-calculus
Advanced class was -1 year. This was Upstate New York 90s/00s. Though I guess to be more specific these courses were actually combination. So it was 3 years of mixed algebra/geometry/trigonometry. Math A, B I think New York called it. Until Pre-calculus Which was actually year and a half courses of mixed topics.
I should've added that I was on the advanced track and was a year ahead of most of my peers, though we had full class of > 20 students (in a graduating class of, I wanna say, ~100-ish) who were in this track. IIRC, it was a toss up what most students did for Math in the 11th and 12th grade. I do believe that the school offered a dedicated Trigonometry and Pre-Calculus course that many students took in the 11th and 12th grades, and there was also an Algebra-based Physics class that students could take, but I want to say that they were not necessary for graduation.
Very roughly, subtract 6 from age to get grade. For example, barring being held back, jumping a grade, or unusual things around birthday timing, you'd usually finish 12th grade at age 18.
