Kirby Urner (KU) posted Mar 14, 2014 9:41 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9411805) - GSC's remarks interspersed: > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 3:52 PM, GS Chandy > <email@example.com> wrote: > > << SNIP >> > > > > Many 'monied' individuals get 'spoilt' by the ease > > with which things fall > > into their laps - they never make the effort to > > overcome any difficulties or barriers. > > > > > I worry about too many stereotypes piling up in a > hurry. > I do try not to stereotype things (as best I can).
i) I had considered the cases of both 'monied', privileged individuals AND 'poor' individuals.
ii) I had qualified the words "monied", "poor" and "spoilt" by putting them between single quotes, more or less to indicate that I was aware of the stereotyping that often occurs.
That said, I do believe it is fair to suggest that 'privileged people' often do take the great good fortune of their privileges for granted, so to speak, and often do not use their abilities effectively, i.e., they get 'spoilt' by the privileges they enjoy, and do not really understand that much of their privilege derives from factors way beyond their personal competence levels.
Also a great many 'poor individuals' do get 'frustrated' with 'the way things are' and for that reason do not use their abilities effectively.
I.e., both 'privileged individuals' and 'poor individuals' do VERY often perform far below their own potentials. The issue is: HOW to enable better use and application of individual and group abilities? The OPMS is a tool that could help, quite significantly. > > I liked reading Richie Rich as a kid, a comic book > (check Google Images) > but have always declared my class to be middle. Mad > Magazine was > probably my favorite though. Is TinTin 1%? How > about Snowy? > Well, when I was a kid I rather rarely read comics, though I was familiar with Capt Marvel, Superman, Batman, etc. I enjoyed Mad Magazine (a bit later, I think). However, I would not by choice spend my limited pocket money or earned money on them; I did spend a lot on books. > > When it came to Occupy in October 2011, manifesting > as "OPDX" in > Portland's Chapman Square and environs , I was > very much with > the 99%, pulling a bike trailer to the Food Not Bombs > booth every so > often , but not tenting there (I preferred to > rename my house the > Blue Tent, old wooden, 1905). > As to my position in the 'war' of the '99%' vs. the '1%', I have for long been a traitor to the 1%. However, I am certain that Maoist (/other violent) insurgency can never work. For quite a while, I was enthusiastic about the 'Occupy' movement - but it seems to have gone nowhere.
How to enable some 'equity' in society (not 'equality'!, which is to my mind evidently impossible). Well, I don't really know, though I do believe it is essential to struggle towards that. However, I do strongly believe that our (humankind's) 'philosophy' that "Humans are the Masters of the Universe!" to be the most dangerous sort of thinking, which has unfortunately spread very far and wide in all societies and most cultures (not only the Western, technological nations).
I'm not optimistic that we shall learn how to tackle the complexly intertwined societal and environmental problems and issues we are are confronting (in time to make an impact on our ultimate fate). > > But by world standards I *am* richie rich and > uber-privileged. I realize > that and don't take it for granted. I've always > volunteered a huge pie > slice of my time to turn the wheels of > volunteer-powered organizations, > be that my Quaker meeting, the local Area Center > (Erhard Inc.) or > the AFSC (also Quaker). See c.v. > > I have that luxury of luxuries: time to devote to > projects as I wish, > unpaid free time, slack, whatever you want to call > it. Some single > mothers (for example) really don't have that. They > are full time > servants of others, many full time servants the same > way, not to > mention slaves, who remain oh so numerous by other > labels. > > Thanks to my privileged background and top drawer > parents, I am > able to both think of, and engage in, studying, as > something one > does "just for the fun of it". When I computed (1 + > 1/n)^n i.e. "just > a nano-tad more than 1 to the gazillionth power" I > was simply turning > wheels developed over thousands upon thousands of > man-woman > hours. Unlike any before my time, I have free access > to machines > that compute like no gear box or slide rule ever > could. I am a > very rich man in terms of the resources available to > me, thanks > to Cyberia (cyberspace). > Well, the same applies, more or less, to my case. > > If you remember Steve Holden, whose name I used at > the start > of a recent thread , he ran this source code I > posted on edu-sig, > doing what I describe above re (1 + 1/10000000000) ^ > 10000000000 > except to way more places, and getting the value of > e, Euler's Number > -- to 301 decimal places to be exact. No calculator > is that powerful. > Yet this is not such expensive hardware I'm using, > and the software > is free. "Why not share the wealth more widely?" > (this Cascadian > asks himself, as he contemplates curriculum / school > reform). > > Steve writes: > > ============ > > From: Steve Holden > Date: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:31 AM > Subject: Re: A bit head-twisty... (Python4 level > topics) > To: Kirby Urner <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Cc: Patrick Barton, Ben Hengst > > Nice work! > > On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:31 PM, Kirby Urner > <email@example.com> wrote: > > Trying to wrap my head around Descriptors: > > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/2014-March/0 > 10952.html > > ... and Context Managers > > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/2014-March/0 > 10951.html > > (both Python4 topics, though we probably see "with" > as a keyword, sooner, > and use descriptors behind the scenes without knowing > it). > > The second example is more convincing when you print > the result (just one > print() call need be added). > > Before the context scope... > Welcome to my world... > This is the suite within the scope of the context > Available from inside: Context manager object at: > 4435516560 > Sorry to see you leave. Come back again soon. > After context... > Do a big decimal computation... > Default precision is: 28 > Precision in suite: 500 > 2.7182818284590452353602874713526624977572470936999595 > 7496 > 696762772407663035354759457138217852516642742746639193 > 2003 > 059921817413596629043572900334295260595630738132328627 > 9434 > 907632338298807531952510190115738341879307021540891499 > 3488 > 416750924476146066808226480016847741185374234544243710 > 7539 > 077744992068192561847609083643651240847324420796055203 > 0134 > 476269496297168954666708122669732499450058879467269279 > 7910 > 362305951357869655506531293786799797488980606647297008 > 0903 > 8036328927095243710166965126324732836 > Default precision is: 28 > Same to 301 places > > That's as many digits as I will ever need! > > S > > ============ > > Kirby > I'm sure I do not understand the above instance - but I shall be looking at all the linkages you have shown (subject to my Internet connection, of course!)