The Athenians would say that we do not have a democracy but an oligarchy. The only way that they saw to actually make the government the will of the people was to select representation by sortition, i.e. drawing by lot, like jury selections.
I don't think that they were wrong in this regard. If we look at the demographics of the house of representatives, they do not come close to making a parallel of the demographics of the country. If representatives were selected at random, we'd have 51% women in the house, we'd have people from all economic backgrounds according to the current wealth disparity instead of only the wealthy. We'd need to actually focus our resources on education if we agreed that really anybody can be selected for representation. If the pool of representatives was large enough (larger than we have now, which is a limitation put in place to make party control easier), then random selection should always result in a representative body that is actually representative.
Just really fresh I think. Backyard chicken eggs from my coworker are like this. I don't know what the big deal about the firmness of the yolk is, but I'm not a pro chef. Tastes like an egg to me. When she gives me eggs, they last a really long time. She says that the way to tell if their old is by how fragile the yolk is. If it breaks going into the pan, then it's bad.
Ok, these guys claim to have invented a great engine, really just the pre-cooler. Why are they trying to build a plane instead of licensing it to others? That seems to be several orders of magnitude more difficult and increases the likelihood of failure.
New Zealand, Australia, and to a lesser extent Sweden all have vast areas with very low, near zero population densities. Could that be impacting the deliverability?
Google is both dominating smart phones and search at the moment. The examples given were of particular products that superseded other products. Is there a product that going to supersede Google Search or Android? If not, I don't see Google at its peak. In fact, with their efforts to take over the last google free screen in your living room, it might be that they're due to break into an even bigger advertising market.
The article also says that just 17% of walks are made for the pleasure of walking. That sounds like a good number to me, should I expect a third of the people I see to be going nowhere?
I agree. I would actually prefer if the test subjects were considered new to all students, and they were expected to become experts in those subjects before taking the test. What you need to score for is the ability to learn and apply the knowledge that you already have to new subjects, not to repeat the basics. You're ready for college when you're able to learn new things and apply them quickly.
It's a good thing IMO that people have to learn 'SAT words', it filters out the ones that are able to put in the effort to expand their vocabulary, and also retain this new knowledge.
I don't think that they were wrong in this regard. If we look at the demographics of the house of representatives, they do not come close to making a parallel of the demographics of the country. If representatives were selected at random, we'd have 51% women in the house, we'd have people from all economic backgrounds according to the current wealth disparity instead of only the wealthy. We'd need to actually focus our resources on education if we agreed that really anybody can be selected for representation. If the pool of representatives was large enough (larger than we have now, which is a limitation put in place to make party control easier), then random selection should always result in a representative body that is actually representative.