ElJeffeRoaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
Okay, fair. Though by being taught cursive, I can read the original copies of founding documents, whether they're in Really-Real Cursive or just cursive's snooty big brother that annoys everyone at cocktail parties. Whereas absent that, reading it would be more difficult (though not impossible), mostly due to your s and r and f and v and a handful of other letters looking weird.
I already said that I don't think I'd support making learning cursive mandatory, and I don't like this bill, so.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Okay, fair. Though by being taught cursive, I can read the original copies of founding documents, whether they're in Really-Real Cursive or just cursive's snooty big brother that annoys everyone at cocktail parties. Whereas absent that, reading it would be more difficult (though not impossible), mostly due to your s and r and f and v and a handful of other letters looking weird.
I already said that I don't think I'd support making learning cursive mandatory, and I don't like this bill, so.
The shit thing is that the bills are never about making sure you can read cursive in case you come across it, but wasting time on cursive penmanship. Because by god i had to trace that stupid fucking capital G 500 times in second grade so these brats should too!
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I can almost see a justification in the fact that a lot of historical documents were written in cursive. Like, if you can't read cursive, you can't read the original Declaration of Independence or the original US Constitution.
Though I'm not sure if I actually care enough to believe it should be mandatory - I don't see why a transcript wouldn't be just as valid for the high schoolers learning about such documents, and it's not like we make kids learn how to read old English before we teach them Beowulf, and cursive could always be an elective for high schoolers who give a shit.
Except that they weren't written in "cursive" (which specifically means Palmer script) - most of our big important documents were written in Copperplate (and it's worth noting that part of the adoption of Palmer was because of the complexity of Copperplate.)
If that sounds like a long winded way to say this bill is goosery of the highest order - you're paying attention!
Neeeerrrrrdddddd
Ok that’s actually cool. I did not know there were different types of cursive
Havelock2.0 on
You go in the cage, cage goes in the water, you go in the water. Shark's in the water, our shark.
I can almost see a justification in the fact that a lot of historical documents were written in cursive. Like, if you can't read cursive, you can't read the original Declaration of Independence or the original US Constitution.
Though I'm not sure if I actually care enough to believe it should be mandatory - I don't see why a transcript wouldn't be just as valid for the high schoolers learning about such documents, and it's not like we make kids learn how to read old English before we teach them Beowulf, and cursive could always be an elective for high schoolers who give a shit.
Except that they weren't written in "cursive" (which specifically means Palmer script) - most of our big important documents were written in Copperplate (and it's worth noting that part of the adoption of Palmer was because of the complexity of Copperplate.)
If that sounds like a long winded way to say this bill is goosery of the highest order - you're paying attention!
But if the letters in the words you've typed aren't joined together, how can I take it seriously?
Okay, fair. Though by being taught cursive, I can read the original copies of founding documents, whether they're in Really-Real Cursive or just cursive's snooty big brother that annoys everyone at cocktail parties. Whereas absent that, reading it would be more difficult (though not impossible), mostly due to your s and r and f and v and a handful of other letters looking weird.
I already said that I don't think I'd support making learning cursive mandatory, and I don't like this bill, so.
Whether or not they look weird also depends on how you were taught print - I was taught D'Neilian script, which is the bastard child of Palmer and block script.
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I recall an argument made somewhere that cursive is a very good tool for teaching kids fine-motor skills while also engaging the parts of their brain related to learning and critical thinking. Like, it forces you to slow down, hold thoughts, and process what you are doing, rather than just quickly writing out as fast as you can (or, worse, just typing on a screen).
One of my philosophy professors liked to paraphrase a famous philosopher (whose name escapes me) who highlighted that the term "ruminate" initially referred to cows constantly chewing and regurgitating their food in order to properly digest it. In that vein, cursive may help in some of the basic cognitive skills required to simply keep a thought static and work through a line of reasoning around it.
This isn't an argument in favor of cursive. I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But if someone were to point out that in the process of learning cursive, kids were exposed to different material which they then had to think about and review, then I don't see the big deal. It would be similar to how we should be teaching kids tools like mnemonics and memory palaces concurrently with their topical education.
I recall an argument made somewhere that cursive is a very good tool for teaching kids fine-motor skills while also engaging the parts of their brain related to learning and critical thinking. Like, it forces you to slow down, hold thoughts, and process what you are doing, rather than just quickly writing out as fast as you can (or, worse, just typing on a screen).
One of my philosophy professors liked to paraphrase a famous philosopher (whose name escapes me) who highlighted that the term "ruminate" initially referred to cows constantly chewing and regurgitating their food in order to properly digest it. In that vein, cursive may help in some of the basic cognitive skills required to simply keep a thought static and work through a line of reasoning around it.
This isn't an argument in favor of cursive. I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But if someone were to point out that in the process of learning cursive, kids were exposed to different material which they then had to think about and review, then I don't see the big deal. It would be similar to how we should be teaching kids tools like mnemonics and memory palaces concurrently with their topical education.
That's true of handwriting generally, rather than cursive specifically.
And I don't think anyone is advocating the abolition of handwriting entirely. Just that you can leave it at manuscript, rather than mandating cursive, because that is how most writing appears and what most people revert to over time anyway.
I recall an argument made somewhere that cursive is a very good tool for teaching kids fine-motor skills while also engaging the parts of their brain related to learning and critical thinking. Like, it forces you to slow down, hold thoughts, and process what you are doing, rather than just quickly writing out as fast as you can (or, worse, just typing on a screen).
One of my philosophy professors liked to paraphrase a famous philosopher (whose name escapes me) who highlighted that the term "ruminate" initially referred to cows constantly chewing and regurgitating their food in order to properly digest it. In that vein, cursive may help in some of the basic cognitive skills required to simply keep a thought static and work through a line of reasoning around it.
This isn't an argument in favor of cursive. I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But if someone were to point out that in the process of learning cursive, kids were exposed to different material which they then had to think about and review, then I don't see the big deal. It would be similar to how we should be teaching kids tools like mnemonics and memory palaces concurrently with their topical education.
That's true of handwriting generally, rather than cursive specifically.
And I don't think anyone is advocating the abolition of handwriting entirely. Just that you can leave it at manuscript, rather than mandating cursive, because that is how most writing appears and what most people revert to over time anyway.
Like I said, I don't really have a dog in this fight. I would not be surprised if the benefits of cursive are small, if even measurable.
Agreed that most of the benefit is likely just in the act of writing itself, rather than the particular style.
I never bothered taking notes unless I could type them. I literally cannot write fast enough without cramping my hand because where righties get to "pull" the pen across paper lefties have to push it at an awkward angle so hand isn't touching the page.
+2
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
It is impossible to take notes fast enough in cursive
Especially if it’s for Econ
I always did find it suspect that people claimed as "common knowledge" that cursive was faster when it was blatantly obvious to anyone who has actually written in cursive that it both takes longer and requires more effort.
Huh. I write ridiculously faster in cursive than in print. I still think teaching cursive is dumb in the modern age. It helps me, but I am a weird minority. It can be a specific intervention for some people as needed.
Edit: Did a quick Google and yeah probably because I am dyslexic. I definitely see the value in keeping it for students who can benefit like me. Definitely doesn't need to be mandatory.
Gnizmo on
0
Options
ElJeffeRoaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
Okay, fair. Though by being taught cursive, I can read the original copies of founding documents, whether they're in Really-Real Cursive or just cursive's snooty big brother that annoys everyone at cocktail parties. Whereas absent that, reading it would be more difficult (though not impossible), mostly due to your s and r and f and v and a handful of other letters looking weird.
I already said that I don't think I'd support making learning cursive mandatory, and I don't like this bill, so.
The shit thing is that the bills are never about making sure you can read cursive in case you come across it, but wasting time on cursive penmanship. Because by god i had to trace that stupid fucking capital G 500 times in second grade so these brats should too!
Yeah, there is literally no reason to be able to write in cursive.
And honestly if you want someone to read a doc in cursive and they don't know it, hand them a quick cheat sheet that's like "this is an S, this is an R, this is an F, you're good to go."
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Practicing handwriting never helped my legibility.
Call me crazy but I feel like all the fucking time that I was stuck learning to write in cursive, which I have mostly forgotten because I don't fucking use it. Would have been better spent teaching me another language and hell, even if it was Latin, a seldom used language, that would still have had more value because it does let you figure out what some words, you've never seen before, mean without having to consult the dictionary.
I mean, I'd probably still would have to resort to using duolingo to currently learn Japanese and I know it's not the best tool, but I'd probably at least have decent usage of some other language that is used today or getting more benefits out of Latin.
My favorite thing is thinking back on my education, being a grade schooler in the mid-90s, and like
cursive writing practice was a year-long activity through several grades
typing was like a 1 week unit where we had fucking printouts of keyboards and just pretended
Ok even if somehow in the 90s you still thought computers were a fad what kind of 50s ass office environment were they prepping us for?
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Interesting note, but not relevant to CA really, a some countries still do legal documents in cursive (or did till recently). A lot of said countries also look at you wierd if your signature is just your name in cursive and NOT some kind of stylized symbol.
The decision would disallow residents of multi-meter properties to consume their own rooftop solar production, even if they own the solar array. The policy forces customers to first sell their solar production to the utility, and then buy it back at higher rates.
Clearly we should just bring back signet rings and wax chops
China still uses them for business matters, and it's serious enough business that losing one is tantamount to bankruptcy. There was a UK based chip maker who lost control of its manufacturing wing for two years and tanked a buyout by nvidia because they didn't get the chop back from a departing CEO and were suddenly faced with a rogue actor who the government recognized as the sole controller of the company, and every means to fix that problem required the seal on the chop to be executed.
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
The article is amazeballs.
The proposed decision is gaining public infamy similar to the NEM 3.0 decision that has wreaked havoc on single-family rooftop solar in California. Despite round after round of anti-NEM 3.0 public comments and rallies that drew in thousands of California citizens, CPUC pushed the decision forward. Now, residential solar is experiencing a massive market contraction nationwide as a result.
The NEM 3.0 decision was backed by the three major investor-owned utilities in California based on a rationale that renters were being left behind by lucrative single-family home installations. Now a year later, CPUC and the three large utilities are coming after renters’ rights.
Main thing I saw about NEM 3.0 was that it cut the energy credits you got from selling electricity from your panels by 75%. Good for utilities and good for the solar battery business, bad for everyone else. Everyone on the CPUC board is a Newsom appointee. Maybe California can pass a Prop that forbids their governors from running for President or something. There's just too much incentive to punch some hippies to setup the nationwide run otherwise. Phrase it as ex-governors not being allowed on the ballot for president and it might even be vaguely constitutional.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
The new solar scheme that people won't stop knocking on my door about is "generating on-site". Similar to leased where they install their own panels and batteries but instead of you paying a flat monthly fee you instead agree to buy electricity from the solar company at a slight per unit discount compared to the utility. I assume they're still putting a lien on your place but I never let the conversation get far enough to ask. They're also stupid insistent on it, had a guy from Sunrun pounding on my door at like 8:05 pm asking if he could audit our meter and bill to see if we qualify
The decision would disallow residents of multi-meter properties to consume their own rooftop solar production, even if they own the solar array. The policy forces customers to first sell their solar production to the utility, and then buy it back at higher rates.
This is such horseshit.
This is the most insane thing legislative wise I have ever read. Why? How is it in the public interest to do this?
I'm going to be in LA for a few days next month(,,,,,)
Trip done -- in the end I wound up using the rental electric scooters a lot of the time, because they worked fine and would get me from A to B on my own schedule and with minimal effort, and I'm used to being among traffic on a much smaller vehicle, so that wasn't a problem.
Final itinerary:
day 1: airport -> union station -> the broad, saw the infinity mirrored room / art, lunch at grand central market, bradbury building, dinner at Kinokuniya, saw La La Land at the rooftop cinema at ROW DTLA.
day 2: scootered a bunch; downtown -> french dip at philippes -> "the Toretto house" (yeah, it's just a house, but I re-watched the whole series recently so couldn't miss the chance to go see the real thing) -> Hollyhock House, found out that in person Frank Lloyd Wright buildings are way more impressive than I'd realised, so then scootered on up to Los Feliz and walked to Griffith Park via the Ennis house, through Griffith Park to the observatory. At this point (wednesday) it started to rain a bunch, but I was commited to the outside, so; on to the Mt.Hollywood tunnel, up to the top of Captain's Roost, through to the Bronson Caves (because of the wizard of speed and time; saw some filming going on there, too, which felt pretty hollywood-y). Walked down to the walk of fame via the Samuel Novarro house (another lloyd wright), lunch at Delicious Pizza (because of young mc / tone loc), then scooter ride back to downtown in a _lot_ of rain after sundown, which was pretty exciting, but fine. (though trying to use my phone to navigate was a pain because it kept on getting phantom touches because it was so wet). Then dinner at Shibuya because the nearest michelin starred restaurant to me otherwise is a 1,100km drive away so I figured I should go while I had the chance. (and the food was amazing, the "best X I have ever had in my life" for at least four separate things).
day 3: took the train to santa monica, rented metro e-bike and rode down to venice, saw the skatepark, giant binoculars, canals; rented non-electric metro bike and rode up to culver city (the electric bike was fine, the non-electric one is _heavy_ feeling, sheesh), saw the Museum of Jurassic Technology, dinner at Versailles, took metro to Inglewood downtown, walked to the Youtube theater for the Devo show, got rideshare back because I didn't feel like walking all the way through that giant set of parking lots again and the trains had started to run a lot less often.
day 4: up to the viewing platform at city hall (which still amazes me that it's free given how good the views are), saw the steps where (the recent) Perry Mason kept on happening, walked around the outside of the disney concert hall / the gardens up there, went down the angels flight railway, saw a strike by the california union of scientists, went to The Last Bookstore, MOCA, the central library, scootered over to olvera st / Avila Adobe.
Got my primary booklet in the mail. It looks like the biggest thing in there is Prop 1, the big bond measure and millionaire tax for homeless and mental health services. Quite a bit of controversy there because a lot of groups that help the target groups already say it'll hurt their resources and programs and do more harm than good. The groups being helped (or "helped") are veterans and people with major mental health issues, if I'm reading this right. Plenty of people lining up for Feinstein's old seat too.
California would become the first state to require new vehicles be equipped with speed governors — technology that limits how fast they can be driven — under legislation by San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener.
The bill, introduced Wednesday, would require cars and trucks of the 2027 model year or later that are built or sold in California to include speed governors that would prohibit motorists from driving more than 10 mph over posted speed limits.
I've found the bill that will cause the Dems to lose control of CA
California would become the first state to require new vehicles be equipped with speed governors — technology that limits how fast they can be driven — under legislation by San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener.
The bill, introduced Wednesday, would require cars and trucks of the 2027 model year or later that are built or sold in California to include speed governors that would prohibit motorists from driving more than 10 mph over posted speed limits.
I've found the bill that will cause the Dems to lose control of CA
That, and the automated speed cameras that are gonna be put up all around LA, handing out a billion tickets for going 10mph over the speed limit.
Like listen, I want cars to be mostly illegal so I can have a nice walkable bikeable city, but as a man of contradictions, this enrages me.
How does the car know what the posted speed limit is?
That's not the right question. The right question is: how often will it get the posted speed limit wrong?
Not "if". How often.
Also, is it actual law or just common guidance that you travel with traffic regardless of the average speed? Like, you're not supposed to go 90 on a 65 highway, but you're not supposed to go 45 either, and if everyone is going 75, I thought it was actually less safe to go 65?
"Let's take a look at the scores! The girls are at the square root of Pi, while the boys are still at a crudely drawn picture of a duck. Clearly, it's anybody's game!"
Posts
I already said that I don't think I'd support making learning cursive mandatory, and I don't like this bill, so.
The shit thing is that the bills are never about making sure you can read cursive in case you come across it, but wasting time on cursive penmanship. Because by god i had to trace that stupid fucking capital G 500 times in second grade so these brats should too!
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Neeeerrrrrdddddd
But if the letters in the words you've typed aren't joined together, how can I take it seriously?
Whether or not they look weird also depends on how you were taught print - I was taught D'Neilian script, which is the bastard child of Palmer and block script.
One of my philosophy professors liked to paraphrase a famous philosopher (whose name escapes me) who highlighted that the term "ruminate" initially referred to cows constantly chewing and regurgitating their food in order to properly digest it. In that vein, cursive may help in some of the basic cognitive skills required to simply keep a thought static and work through a line of reasoning around it.
This isn't an argument in favor of cursive. I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But if someone were to point out that in the process of learning cursive, kids were exposed to different material which they then had to think about and review, then I don't see the big deal. It would be similar to how we should be teaching kids tools like mnemonics and memory palaces concurrently with their topical education.
That's true of handwriting generally, rather than cursive specifically.
https://nautil.us/cursive-handwriting-and-other-education-myths-236094/
And I don't think anyone is advocating the abolition of handwriting entirely. Just that you can leave it at manuscript, rather than mandating cursive, because that is how most writing appears and what most people revert to over time anyway.
It's already hard enough to write legibly in a normal way while trying to avoid smearing everything as I write it
Especially if it’s for Econ
Like I said, I don't really have a dog in this fight. I would not be surprised if the benefits of cursive are small, if even measurable.
Agreed that most of the benefit is likely just in the act of writing itself, rather than the particular style.
I always did find it suspect that people claimed as "common knowledge" that cursive was faster when it was blatantly obvious to anyone who has actually written in cursive that it both takes longer and requires more effort.
Edit: Did a quick Google and yeah probably because I am dyslexic. I definitely see the value in keeping it for students who can benefit like me. Definitely doesn't need to be mandatory.
Yeah, there is literally no reason to be able to write in cursive.
And honestly if you want someone to read a doc in cursive and they don't know it, hand them a quick cheat sheet that's like "this is an S, this is an R, this is an F, you're good to go."
I mean, I'd probably still would have to resort to using duolingo to currently learn Japanese and I know it's not the best tool, but I'd probably at least have decent usage of some other language that is used today or getting more benefits out of Latin.
cursive writing practice was a year-long activity through several grades
typing was like a 1 week unit where we had fucking printouts of keyboards and just pretended
Ok even if somehow in the 90s you still thought computers were a fad what kind of 50s ass office environment were they prepping us for?
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I think that probably had more to do with each individual computer at the time costing the equivalent of $12k today
It’s an idea, really
Yeah, let's do that!
I have a completely unrelated idea for a business selling the molds made from impressions. Clay, concrete, wax...
For entertainment purposes only, of course.
This is such horseshit.
China still uses them for business matters, and it's serious enough business that losing one is tantamount to bankruptcy. There was a UK based chip maker who lost control of its manufacturing wing for two years and tanked a buyout by nvidia because they didn't get the chop back from a departing CEO and were suddenly faced with a rogue actor who the government recognized as the sole controller of the company, and every means to fix that problem required the seal on the chop to be executed.
Main thing I saw about NEM 3.0 was that it cut the energy credits you got from selling electricity from your panels by 75%. Good for utilities and good for the solar battery business, bad for everyone else. Everyone on the CPUC board is a Newsom appointee. Maybe California can pass a Prop that forbids their governors from running for President or something. There's just too much incentive to punch some hippies to setup the nationwide run otherwise. Phrase it as ex-governors not being allowed on the ballot for president and it might even be vaguely constitutional.
This is the most insane thing legislative wise I have ever read. Why? How is it in the public interest to do this?
Trip done -- in the end I wound up using the rental electric scooters a lot of the time, because they worked fine and would get me from A to B on my own schedule and with minimal effort, and I'm used to being among traffic on a much smaller vehicle, so that wasn't a problem.
Final itinerary:
day 1: airport -> union station -> the broad, saw the infinity mirrored room / art, lunch at grand central market, bradbury building, dinner at Kinokuniya, saw La La Land at the rooftop cinema at ROW DTLA.
day 2: scootered a bunch; downtown -> french dip at philippes -> "the Toretto house" (yeah, it's just a house, but I re-watched the whole series recently so couldn't miss the chance to go see the real thing) -> Hollyhock House, found out that in person Frank Lloyd Wright buildings are way more impressive than I'd realised, so then scootered on up to Los Feliz and walked to Griffith Park via the Ennis house, through Griffith Park to the observatory. At this point (wednesday) it started to rain a bunch, but I was commited to the outside, so; on to the Mt.Hollywood tunnel, up to the top of Captain's Roost, through to the Bronson Caves (because of the wizard of speed and time; saw some filming going on there, too, which felt pretty hollywood-y). Walked down to the walk of fame via the Samuel Novarro house (another lloyd wright), lunch at Delicious Pizza (because of young mc / tone loc), then scooter ride back to downtown in a _lot_ of rain after sundown, which was pretty exciting, but fine. (though trying to use my phone to navigate was a pain because it kept on getting phantom touches because it was so wet). Then dinner at Shibuya because the nearest michelin starred restaurant to me otherwise is a 1,100km drive away so I figured I should go while I had the chance. (and the food was amazing, the "best X I have ever had in my life" for at least four separate things).
day 3: took the train to santa monica, rented metro e-bike and rode down to venice, saw the skatepark, giant binoculars, canals; rented non-electric metro bike and rode up to culver city (the electric bike was fine, the non-electric one is _heavy_ feeling, sheesh), saw the Museum of Jurassic Technology, dinner at Versailles, took metro to Inglewood downtown, walked to the Youtube theater for the Devo show, got rideshare back because I didn't feel like walking all the way through that giant set of parking lots again and the trains had started to run a lot less often.
day 4: up to the viewing platform at city hall (which still amazes me that it's free given how good the views are), saw the steps where (the recent) Perry Mason kept on happening, walked around the outside of the disney concert hall / the gardens up there, went down the angels flight railway, saw a strike by the california union of scientists, went to The Last Bookstore, MOCA, the central library, scootered over to olvera st / Avila Adobe.
So all in all, I kept fairly busy. A few photos:
I've found the bill that will cause the Dems to lose control of CA
A lot of cars detect signage now and put a little speed limit symbol on your dashboard.
That, and the automated speed cameras that are gonna be put up all around LA, handing out a billion tickets for going 10mph over the speed limit.
Like listen, I want cars to be mostly illegal so I can have a nice walkable bikeable city, but as a man of contradictions, this enrages me.
That's not the right question. The right question is: how often will it get the posted speed limit wrong?
Not "if". How often.
Also, is it actual law or just common guidance that you travel with traffic regardless of the average speed? Like, you're not supposed to go 90 on a 65 highway, but you're not supposed to go 45 either, and if everyone is going 75, I thought it was actually less safe to go 65?
And how often do they get it wrong?
Honestly, from my experience.....never?
Outside of temporary stuff like construction, anyway.
Is that actually done via signage? I always assumed it was GPS.