• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Technology and education

Read the question. You agree?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 18.8%

  • No

    Votes: 26 81.3%
  • Total voters
    32
Ikari said:
You should see some of the rules on the labs...you'd think that we were handling weapons grade plutonium or something when it's just optical grade methanol.
Click to expand...

I work in a warehouse, we have to have MSDS sheets for engine oil and anti freeze and have to do half assed training on how to clean up chemical spills.
It's idiotic.

Ikari said:
I think one of the real problems with Academia is that it's being treated as a business when it's not really a business. Dilutes the education and pulls focus from where it should be.
Click to expand...

I agree.
If anything it's exploratory research and I tend to think that if it's subsidized by the state, the fruits of such research should be open source (no patent protections for the results).
 
Ikari said:
But they're so prized that they can get a job anywhere, yes? So said you. Ergo, they need not this "foot in the door". And thus they can do the necessary research for engineering that cannot be supported by the private sector.
Click to expand...

So... you don't want competition for the free labor you currently enjoy. You want unpaid lab rats to do the legwork for your experiments, thus you would deny them the opportunity to get jobs in the real world which could actually help them get a job in the future. Got it.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
If anything it's exploratory research and I tend to think that if it's subsidized by the state, the fruits of such research should be open source (no patent protections for the results).
Click to expand...

It's pretty hard to patent things from a government lab, it turns out. But I do agree, base research cannot be supported by the private industry; it's too costly and takes too long. We subsidize it through grad students and paying them crap (though they get an education, so it's win-win in the end). The normal ebb and flow is that an engineer or a scientist does research, gets the PhD, goes out to industry and then actually starts developing solutions based on their research. It does have to flow out of academia and into the private sector, else it falls apart.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Just because it happens that way now, doesn't mean, it will or should in the future.
In all honesty, I have a sort of chip on my shoulder with institutional research.

Laws have been created which prevent more non institutional engineering, especially chemical engineering.
Trying to buy regents, is a bitch, if you're not an institution.
To me, it's sort of an ego trip for institutions, to think they should the primary source of creation and building.
Click to expand...

You're not building a bomb in your basement, are you? :lol:
 
Peter Grimm said:
So... you don't want competition for the free labor you currently enjoy. You want unpaid lab rats to do the legwork for your experiments, thus you would deny them the opportunity to get jobs in the real world which could actually help them get a job in the future. Got it.
Click to expand...

Don't make stupid statements. You said they don't need it, they're prized and can find a job anywhere. So what is it? Do they need the step up or are they so prized that they don't need it? Or are you just going to change your mind depending on how the argument is going?
 
Peter Grimm said:
You're not building a bomb in your basement, are you? :lol:
Click to expand...

Not at all. :lol:

In all seriousness, I wanted to teach my kids chemical synthesis when they got older.
Schools don't do it anymore and I think it's important for them to understand how chemistry works and where things come from.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Fixed it for you.
Click to expand...

If by fixed you mean "made it stupid on purpose" then yes. Otherwise, no. And if the latter I suggest you figure out what "fix" means.
 
Ikari said:
Don't make stupid statements. You said they don't need it, they're prized and can find a job anywhere. So what is it? Do they need the step up or are they so prized that they don't need it? Or are you just going to change your mind depending on how the argument is going?
Click to expand...

You're convoluting my point. My suggestion was to utilize private sector internships as part of a student's education. The key word being STUDENT.

ENGINEERS are coveted and prized. That is what I said. To be an engineer, one must have a degree.

An engineering student would only be coveted as an intern if we knew he was going to eventually graduate and get his engineering degree.
 
Peter Grimm said:
You're convoluting my point. My suggestion was to utilize private sector internships as part of a student's education. The key word being STUDENT.

ENGINEERS are coveted and prized. That is what I said. To be an engineer, one must have a degree.

An engineering student would only be coveted as an intern if we knew he was going to eventually graduate and get his engineering degree.
Click to expand...

I don't think I convoluted your point, I think you took care of that yourself just fine.
 
Ikari said:
It's pretty hard to patent things from a government lab, it turns out. But I do agree, base research cannot be supported by the private industry; it's too costly and takes too long. We subsidize it through grad students and paying them crap (though they get an education, so it's win-win in the end). The normal ebb and flow is that an engineer or a scientist does research, gets the PhD, goes out to industry and then actually starts developing solutions based on their research. It does have to flow out of academia and into the private sector, else it falls apart.
Click to expand...

I agree that currently that's true, but I willing to see if alternatives exist.
There is tremendous potential for kids in high school, to train them and encourage them in pre engineering design and construction.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I agree that currently that's true, but I willing to see if alternatives exist.
There is tremendous potential for kids in high school, to train them and encourage them in pre engineering design and construction.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and it should be encouraged. We need engineers and scientists, without a doubt; this is how humanity progresses. I'd change K-12 into a trimester system (no summer break for months), I'd install the proper levels to higher education Trade/Tech School, Community College, College, and University. Those are all different things (we use College and University rather interchangeably these days), and I would fund the bejesus out of them...essentially make it public utility if one could.
 
Ikari said:
Indeed, and it should be encouraged. We need engineers and scientists, without a doubt; this is how humanity progresses. I'd change K-12 into a trimester system (no summer break for months), I'd install the proper levels to higher education Trade/Tech School, Community College, College, and University. Those are all different things (we use College and University rather interchangeably these days), and I would fund the bejesus out of them...essentially make it public utility if one could.
Click to expand...

Won't happen, engineering programs are a safety hazard to teenagers.
Or so says the helicopter moms and safety nazi's.
 
Ikari said:
I don't think I convoluted your point, I think you took care of that yourself just fine.
Click to expand...

For being an educated man, you are having a hard time following a pretty simple line of logic.

A. The free market prizes engineers, or future engineers.

B. Engineers must have degrees.

That's it. It's so simple, a cave man could do it.

Now, say we instituted my plan, and engineering students had more internships and worked fewer hours in your nonsense academic sweatshop for bogus research. Companies would still prize them because they would meet requirement "A."

However, in addition, they would gain real world experience which is invaluable. They could better figure out which company they want to go to work for in the future, and what they want to do. They could advance faster, having already got one foot in the door, so to speak. They could earn money while attending school, so they wouldn't be forced in to debt.

But you're not interested in any of this. You're only interested in free labor for your government subsidized research.
 
Ikari said:
Indeed, and it should be encouraged. We need engineers and scientists, without a doubt; this is how humanity progresses. I'd change K-12 into a trimester system (no summer break for months), I'd install the proper levels to higher education Trade/Tech School, Community College, College, and University. Those are all different things (we use College and University rather interchangeably these days), and I would fund the bejesus out of them...essentially make it public utility if one could.
Click to expand...

If you had a real job in the private sector, you know, one in which you earn your own living instead of living off the taxpayer, you wouldn't entertain such delusions.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Won't happen, engineering programs are a safety hazard to teenagers.
Or so says the helicopter moms and safety nazi's.
Click to expand...

You know where most innovation comes from? Small business. Not from government research, but from small mom-and-pop businesses who aren't afraid to tinker and try new things out.

People like you, building bombs in your basement.

That needs to be encouraged, and free markets are the way to do it.
 
Peter Grimm said:
You know where most innovation comes from? Small business. Not from government research, but from small mom-and-pop businesses who aren't afraid to tinker and try new things out.

People like you, building bombs in your basement.

That needs to be encouraged, and free markets are the way to do it.
Click to expand...

Just for clarity, the last attempt I made to build bombs, was when I was a teenager.
As an adult, I haven't done jack, just exploring my options.

Chemical synthesis is just fun.

A cool book about it.

Amazon.com: Illustrated Guide to Home Chemistry Experiments: All Lab, No Lecture (DIY Science) (9780596514921): Robert Bruce Thompson: Books
 
Peter Grimm said:
For being an educated man, you are having a hard time following a pretty simple line of logic.

A. The free market prizes engineers, or future engineers.

B. Engineers must have degrees.

That's it. It's so simple, a cave man could do it.

Now, say we instituted my plan, and engineering students had more internships and worked fewer hours in your nonsense academic sweatshop for bogus research. Companies would still prize them because they would meet requirement "A."

However, in addition, they would gain real world experience which is invaluable. They could better figure out which company they want to go to work for in the future, and what they want to do. They could advance faster, having already got one foot in the door, so to speak. They could earn money while attending school, so they wouldn't be forced in to debt.

But you're not interested in any of this. You're only interested in free labor for your government subsidized research.
Click to expand...

A) That research has to happen otherwise engineering will come screeching to a halt when base engineering research hasn't been performed to advance various technology
B) Experience in the lab is experience

I'm interested in propelling the Republic forward and maintaining America as the leader in innovation and technology.
 
Peter Grimm said:
If you had a real job in the private sector, you know, one in which you earn your own living instead of living off the taxpayer, you wouldn't entertain such delusions.
Click to expand...

I do have a job in the private sector. I'm not in academia anymore, though I miss it. It was a lot of fun and you had way more freedom and could do much more interesting research than in industry; but the hours sucked!
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Won't happen, engineering programs are a safety hazard to teenagers.
Or so says the helicopter moms and safety nazi's.
Click to expand...

******s and communists! When I was in grad school, and undergraduate killed himself in the labs. Literally (though not intentionally). Shorted 3-Phase across his chest. They revived his ass, he's no worse for the wear and hell, now he's immune to electricity.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Just for clarity, the last attempt I made to build bombs, was when I was a teenager.
As an adult, I haven't done jack, just exploring my options.

Chemical synthesis is just fun.

A cool book about it.

Amazon.com: Illustrated Guide to Home Chemistry Experiments: All Lab, No Lecture (DIY Science) (9780596514921): Robert Bruce Thompson: Books
Click to expand...


I know, I was just messing with you.

You reminded me of one time in high school, my friends and I made a "bomb" out of styrofoam, gasoline, and a metal can. We lit it off in a field, under a bridge. Bad idea.... there was a giant plume of smoke over there forever.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I know, I was just messing with you.

You reminded me of one time in high school, my friends and I made a "bomb" out of styrofoam, gasoline, and a metal can. We lit it off in a field, under a bridge. Bad idea.... there was a giant plume of smoke over there forever.
Click to expand...

I used model rocket engines, also the gas/styrofoam stuff, something else I can't remember.
I'm surprised I didn't ignite the model rocket engines and burn my hand off, to be honest.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I know, I was just messing with you.

You reminded me of one time in high school, my friends and I made a "bomb" out of styrofoam, gasoline, and a metal can. We lit it off in a field, under a bridge. Bad idea.... there was a giant plume of smoke over there forever.
Click to expand...

They called that "napalm" but it wasn't close. I made that. It wasn't too much fun.

Drain-O and Al foil was fun

We did make a fire ball launcher out of PVC pipe, gasoline, and tennis balls that worked really well until the entirety of the contraption caught on fire

One of the best pranks I ever pulled was in High School when we put exploding tennis balls into the tennis teams basket. Hilarious!
 
Ikari said:
One of the best pranks I ever pulled was in High School when we put exploding tennis balls into the tennis teams basket. Hilarious!
Click to expand...

:lamo Where is youtube when you need it? That sounds like it would have been hilarious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom