For my self preservation I don't bike there. I don't want to be the statistic, and there are so many other places to bicycle without dangerous car traffic. Driving in general works out because the people around us can usually compensate for the mistakes that we'll invariably make, and thus avoid (or mitigate) an accident. This is harder for a bicyclist --- a bicyclist can't accelerate away, handle a swipe, recover from a collision, and is harder to see.
You're kidding right? How are pictures of cocks more dangerous than insincerity, lies, trophy girlfriends, mistrust, and narcissism? There is a reason the movie contrasted these elements. Something about American morality.
It works very well in inner-city schools. See The Lives of Children: The Story of the First Street School by Dennison.
I can't imagine that this article was supposed to add value to the public-school debate. Here are two non-controversial goals that children should achieve while growing up:
1. They should build durable cognitive connections.
2. And they should flourish (which has a psychological meaning).
The public schools address neither goal. They can't. They actively work against both goals. Most children would be better off without school (since public school is a massive opportunity cost).
They had to widen the columns in the chart to make room for Tesla's growth numbers. What is interesting is that Tesla is right behind BMW and Daimler for the "luxury and sports" segment.
Also, when I said 'quite a bit', I was thinking about the data-plumbing logic --- not UI and WebKit logic. It doesn't really make sense to rewrite WebKit.
I rewrote quite a bit of the Chromium browser in Go, achieving a 10x reduction in lines of code (I stopped this project before I could reliably evaluate performance). Since Chromium uses a multi-process model, this was pretty easy: I implemented the Chromium IPC protocol in Go (I wrote a Chromium utility to emit a JSON description of the IPC protocol), and then told the privileged and unprivileged Chromium processes to use my Go subprocess rather than the original logic. My Go logic ran on both Windows and Mac OS X.
I agree. Governance bodies may take public comments, but for the ceremony and to legitimize the process; they ignore them, and vote as if they never took place. I've seen the same elsewhere, such as at the Menlo Park City School District meeting: they take comments, ignore them, then vote how they intended to vote prior to the public discussion. But think how hard it is to process creative discussion on your feet, particularly when arguments arise that repudiate your position, and you have no way to validate the new arguments or to research them prior to the vote. Whom do you trust? What should you do? It is the process that is broken: votes should not happen immediately after the comment period, but after a period of evaluation of the comments; and then the governance body should have to repudiate the comments or at least to reply to them.
There is a scandal in the sense that the people running the schools earn significant benefits at the expense of the students: they charge the students substantial tuition rates, leaving the students with horrible debt, and a low probability that their education can be applied to cover the debt (more likely, the students' own tenacity will help them overcome the debt). You might argue that the students willingly walk into the trap, but I'd argue that the university has a duty and responsibility to guide the students towards a successful life path, and these days, that would legitimately mean advising their students to attend other schools.
I wouldn't call David Brooks' quotes smears. His whole article, perhaps, but not the quotes. The quotes are pieces of evidence in his thesis, which is that Snowden doesn't participate in a community --- Snowden has isolated himself, and that this leak is behavior consistent with someone that has isolated himself from a community. Brooks' outlook on the world tends to be built on models of culture, community, and psychology, and this article is just an application of those models to the particular topic of Snowden. Someone that writes columns tends to have some models that they've developed, and produces new columns by applying those models to current events. In that sense, he is profiting from Snowden's dilemma, and taking advantage of it --- if what Brooks says is true, then what Snowden really needs is support.