Bill Gates chce zbawić świat

D

Deleted member 427

Guest
Podczas TED2010 Bill Gates ujawnia swoją wizję energetycznej przyszłości opisując potrzebę wynalezienia cudów, by zapobiec katastrofie planety.

Główne cele programu:

- redukcja emisji CO2 do zera w roku 2050;
- budowa nowej super elektrowni atomowej;
- reforma sektora służby zdrowia;
- kontrolowane zmniejszanie populacji ludzkiej o 15% za pomocą szczepionek i "produktywnych działań w sferze urodzeń" (w nowomowie może to oznaczać np. "darmową" aborcje);

http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates.html (polskie napisy)
 

Piter1489

libnetoholik
2 072
1 939
kawador napisał:
kontrolowane zmniejszanie populacji ludzkiej o 15% za pomocą szczepionek

To jest dobre, jak mam to rozumieć? Szczepionki wywołujące bezpłodność? Czy wszczepianie ludziom wirusów? Nie wiem.

Ten koleś mnie przeraża.
 

kr2y510

konfederata targowicki
12 509
23 614
Ja przypuszczam, że jest dokładnie odwrotnie. To inni mają taki plan, a BG go tylko ujawnił. Robi to z premedytacją.
Zagrożeniem są ci co doszli do władzy. Demokracja, humanitaryzm, powszechna edukacja, komunizm i do władzy doszła najgorsza zaraza. Gówno z dupy Platona, Hegla, Marksa i innych pojebów.
Lekarstwem na to są masowe lincze skurwysynów i pojebów.
 

Cyberius

cybertarianin, technohumanista
1 441
36
kawador napisał:
Podczas TED2010 Bill Gates ujawnia swoją wizję energetycznej przyszłości opisując potrzebę wynalezienia cudów, by zapobiec katastrofie planety.

Zawsze można wspierać konkurencję największych dzieci B.G. -czyli Micro i Windy: Stefka Jopsa i linuksy-unixy:)
http://distrowatch.com/

Walka z co2.
Energooszczędne systemy operacyjne emitujące mniej co2 do atmosfery
był taki wątek http://libertarianizm.net/thread-1120.html
 

GAZDA

EL GAZDA
7 687
10 676
KrzysiekKS napisał:
Czyli chcą zmniejszyć liczbę ludności o 900 mln/miliard? Bardzo dobrze ale prosze likwidować tylko tych o socjalistycznych poglądach:D.
jak mi zapłacą to moge już zacząć likwidować hehe
 
OP
D

Deleted member 427

Guest
Steve Jobs i Bill Gates zanim stali się sławni i bogaci:

Steve-Jobs-and-Bill-Gates.jpg
 
OP
D

Deleted member 427

Guest
Z całym szacunkiem dla Gatesa za to, czego w życiu dokonał - ale najwięksi tzw. kapitaliści zawsze opowiadali się po stronie zamordyzmu. Zamordyzm leży w ich interesie. Wszystkie rządy - zwłaszcza lewicowe - są podatne na wpływy i dyskretne środki kapitalistów. Z drugiej strony nic nie gwarantuje większej forsy niż realizacja kontraktów rządowych, więc obydwie grupy z radością się nawzajem wspierają.
 

Cyberius

cybertarianin, technohumanista
1 441
36
KrzysiekKS napisał:
Gates wygląda jakby był na prochach:) Ale zastanawia mnie jedno, skąd taki kapitalista
Bill nie jest kapitalistą jeśli za kapitalistę rozumiemy zwolennika wolnego rynku i wolnej wymiany:)
Wśród ludzi bardzo bogatych jest niewielu kapitalistów [ choć są nawet libertarianie]
Socjalizm i przymusowa redystrybucja bardziej się im połaca od wolnego rynku:)
 

FatBantha

sprzedawca niszowych etosów
Członek Załogi
8 403
23 627
Za zbrodnie przeciw aprioryzmowi zabić kurwa tych ludzi.

BY JASON RANTZ
FEBRUARY 19, 2021 AT 4:29 PM

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is bankrolling a group of activists who believe math is racist.
A group of fringe educators have compiled a six-part toolkit offering an “integrated approach” to developing an “anti-racist math practice” viewed through a social justice lens. It chides the “concept of mathematics being purely objective” as “unequivocally false.” It argues focusing on the “right answer” to math equations is an example of white supremacy.
The toolkit A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction is meant to help educators in grades 6-8. If your child’s educators subscribe to any of the beliefs in these texts, you should pull them immediately.

Math is racist. Wrong answers are white supremacy

The toolkit focuses on the 2021 progressive buzzword of “equity” and claims white supremacy and mathematics go hand in hand.
The resources help educators rid their classrooms of the scourge of racist math by making their students dumber. For example, the lessons in Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction warn educators that “white supremacy culture” shows up in the classroom when teachers “treat mistakes as problems by equating them with wrongness” because it “reinforces the ideas of perfectionism (that students shouldn’t make mistakes) and paternalism (teachers or other experts can and should correct mistakes).”
It doesn’t explain why this is white supremacist culture. It just says that it is.
A quick way to dismantle the white supremacist culture, according to the text, is to eliminate order in the classroom. The text argues, “requiring students to raise their hand before speaking can reinforce paternalism and powerhoarding, in addition to breaking the process of thinking, learning, and communicating.”
Instead, it recommends you teach math via “storytelling circles, incorporating dance, music, song, call and response, and other cultural ways of communicating.”

To be an anti-racist math teacher, admit your racism

The toolkit explains that if you truly want to be an anti-racist math teacher, you must embrace your identity. And you’re likely a virulent racist. But it’s OK. The resources will guide you through the “emotionally difficult work of coaching for math equity.”
Prior to engaging in any instruction session with students, educators must do some soul searching. They are told to address their “underlying inherently racist beliefs and biases, positionality, and personal power within that positionality.”
Once completed, you’re on your way to challenging “the ways that math is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”
“Often the emphasis is placed on learning math in the ‘real world,’ as if our classrooms are not a part of the real world,” the text reads. “This reinforces notions of either/or thinking because math is only seen as useful when it is in a particular context. However, this can result in using mathematics to uphold capitalist and imperialist ways of being and understandings of the world.”
To that end, teachers are instructed to: “Review all the ways that word problems and context show up in the curriculum. Limit or eliminate references to money, especially when transactional.”
No word on barter or redistributing other people’s wealth.

Math is different for students of color

A core belief of the toolkit is that students of color interpret and use math differently than white students. If you teach students of color the “right” way to do math, you are reinforcing white supremacy culture.
“It allows the defensiveness of Western mathematics to prevail, without addressing underlying causes of why certain groups of students are ‘underperforming,’ a characterization that should also be interrogated,” the text warns. “It also presupposes that ‘good’ math teaching is about a Eurocentric type of mathematics, devoid of cultural ways of being.”
Ironically, the text itself is wildly racist. It treats all minority students as somehow inferior to white students, claiming they’re not capable of understanding the correct way to learn math.
When it chides educators for “reinforcing objectivity and the idea that there is only one right way” to solve equations because it “dismisses students’ own ways of processing,” it presupposes that only non-white students would have this issue. That somehow other students can understand that way but only students of color are incapable. That line of thinking should be rejected.

Bill and Melinda Gates connection

It’s unclear why the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are bankrolling this kind of radical nonsense.
The Pathway‘s website thanks the Gates Foundation for “their generous financial support of this project.” No other nonprofit is listed for donations and they do not list the amount donated. But they have been active in promoting similar principles on math.
According to the Washington Free Beacon, the Gates Foundation gave nearly “$140 million to some of the groups behind Pathway, whose antiracist resources are the basis for a new teacher training course offered by the Oregon Department of Education.”
The Gates Foundation also gave tens of millions to The Education Trust, a proponent of the Pathways toolkit.
They did not respond to Free Beacon’s request for comment.

It’s already being taught in Seattle

In Seattle Public Schools, this concept was floated in late 2019 after a draft Ethnic Studies framework was released. But it’s already being taught in one classroom.
Shraddha Shirude is a second-year math teacher at Garfield High. And she is teaching an elective course for the 2020–21 school year: Ethnic Studies Math.
“You can see math everywhere in the world and in every interaction, whether that’s human … animal … plant … universe. But that’s not how we’re taught to look at it, and that’s how it’s used to oppress people,” she tells the South Seattle Emerald. “How is math used for oppression? The easiest way to look at it — which is a social justice math way of looking at it — is when you don’t teach a student how math can impact them in the real world, then you’re doing them a disservice, and therefore you’re oppressing their knowledge and understanding.”
She goes on to say: “Yet if you’re teaching them to understand and accept the world as it is, you risk harming and possibly re-oppressing them. Teaching them why it matters to them personally is how you actually support every student of every race in one lesson. You teach them to consider their identity and ask: ‘How can I make the world better?'”
Make sense?

Pundits differ as to the causes but here are some facts parents should know
DENYSE O'LEARY FEBRUARY 16, 2021
The Oregon Department of Education (ODE) recently encouraged teachers to register for training that encourages “ethnomathematics,” an education trend that argues, “among other things, that White supremacy manifests itself in the focus on finding the right answer”:
“The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so,” the document for the “Equitable Math” toolkit reads. “Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict.” …
An associated “Dismantling Racism” workbook, linked within the toolkit, similarly identifies “objectivity” — described as “the belief that there is such a thing as being objective or ‘neutral'” — as a characteristic of White supremacy.
Instead of focusing on one right answer, the toolkit encourages teachers to “come up with at least two answers that might solve this problem.”
SAM DORMAN, “OREGON PROMOTES TEACHER PROGRAM THAT SEEKS TO UNDO ‘RACISM IN MATHEMATICS’” AT FOX NEWS (FEBRUARY 11, 2021)
Opponents of the new trend offer varying accounts of its origin — perhaps it results from in changes in overall philosophy of life or perhaps from the practical need to placate teachers’ unions, which may have various objectives apart from enabling numeracy in students. No matter, not only are x and y under attack but so is 2 + 2 = 4. Republished here is a piece I wrote for Salvo recently,Why can’t Winston count?,” which provides some background:

A dear friend is a math teacher who has a hard time understanding the new intersectional war on math, based on critical theory. Trying to explain is frustrating. Like most opponents, she attempts logical refutations. But logic is the prime target in the war. A bit of recent history might help.
One of the earlier proposals was to abolish algebra at community colleges. By 2017, a growing number of educators wanted to dump it:
Algebra is one of the biggest hurdles to getting a high school or college degree — particularly for students of color and first-generation undergrads. It is also the single most failed course in community colleges across the country. So if you’re not a STEM major (science, technology, engineering, math), why even study algebra?
KAYLA LATTIMORE AND JULIE DEPENBROCK, “SAY GOODBYE TO X+Y: SHOULD COMMUNITY COLLEGES ABOLISH ALGEBRA?” AT NPR (JULY 21, 2017)
It has become clear that a much more ambitious project is now in hand: to replace math with social justice math, including, perhaps, a name change. Educator Rochelle Gutierrez, whose specialty is “equity issues in mathematics education,” was to give a keynote presentation, “Mathematx: Towards a way of Being,” at a Mathematics Education and Society Conference in India in early 2019, according to whose abstract, “Drawing upon Indigenous worldviews to reconceptualize what mathematics is and how it is practiced, I argue for a movement against objects, truths, and knowledge towards a way of being in the world that is guided by first principles — mathematx.”*
By 2019, the movement was gaining strength. A preview of the new Seattle math curriculum gives some sense of it. British commentator Douglas Murray noted,
Just one of the sub-questions that students will be invited to consider here is “How can we use math to measure the impact of activism?” Because, of course, what matters most in this world is engaging in impactful activism. Elsewhere students will be invited to consider the following question, “Can you suggest resolutions to oppressive mathematical practices?”
DOUGLAS MURRAY, “WILL MATHS SUCCUMB TO THE WOKE WAVE?” AT UNHERD (OCTOBER 4, 2019)
My math teacher friend would say, “It’s not clear that Seattle students will be competent enough in math to reflect on its practices.” No, but why assume that competence in math is the goal?
One target has been the equals sign, =, once considered the bedrock of mathematics. As one tech writer explains,
It seems to make an entirely fundamental and uncontroversial statement: These things are exactly the same. But there is a growing community of mathematicians who regard the equal sign as math’s original error. They see it as a veneer that hides important complexities in the way quantities are related — complexities that could unlock solutions to an enormous number of problems. They want to reformulate mathematics in the looser language of equivalence.
KEVIN HARTNETT, “IS THE EQUAL SIGN OVERRATED? MATHEMATICIANS HASH IT OUT” AT WIRED (OCTOBER 13, 2019)
For many, perhaps, it’s a welcome deliverance from equations that don’t equate. The new element is that mathematicians are getting behind this trend. That’s doubtless for a variety of reasons, one of which must be, these days, the risk of Cancellation.
They have reason to fear, given that the war has now spread to 2+2=4. In July of this year, teacher and PhD student Brittany Marshall, gained a good deal of attention on Twitter for proclaiming “Nope the idea of 2+2 equaling 4 is cultural and because of western imperialism/colonization, we think of it as the only way of knowing.” Editor and commentator Paula Bolyard responded to one of Marshall’s supporters, “The iPhone you typed those tweets on is based on the binary system — ones and zeroes, not fives and four thousands.” True, but such facts have come to be seen as instruments of oppression. Bringing them up is hostility.
Author and scholar Nancy Pearcey notes that math is by no means exclusively Western:
We all use Arabic numerals, and in my college math class, we learned that the concept of zero as a place holder came from India; that the Babylonians gave us the 360-degree circle and the 60-minute hour; that the Babylonians, Egyptians, and Chinese all had a rough idea of the value of pi.
NANCY PEARCEY, “DOES MATHEMATICS = WESTERN IMPERIALISM?” AT THE FEDERALIST (JULY 26, 2020)
Again, true, but hardly relevant in the Year Zero, when Western thinkers are denounced because they support objectivity and logical thinking, whatever its origin.
Just to show how deep the rejection goes, one of the drivers in the war on 2 + 2 = 4 was the use of that concept by an opponent to explain the worldview of the new critical theorists. Social scientist and mathematician James Lindsay quoted George Orwell (1903–1950) in 1984, “Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4. If that is granted, all else follows.” He then found that many academics, including some mathematicians, are quite comfortable with the idea that 2+2 might = 5. He later wrote,
I have to confess responsibility for this bizarre moment, which in some sense might be one of the greater achievements of my life thus far. There’s an excellent case to be made that I have led a significant number of professionals who definitely should know otherwise — as effectively every six-year-old in a community with a school does — to dig deeply into tortured defenses of the proposition that two and two do not make four.
JAMES LINDSAY, “2+2 NEVER EQUALS 5” AT NEW DISCOURSES (AUGUST 3, 2020)
There is a history here. Lindsay, with Helen Pluckrose, was one of Peter Boghossian’s embattled Sokal hoaxers. They wrote clearly ridiculous papers that were accepted in social science journals.
He and Pluckrose have now written a book, Cynical Theories (Pitchstone, 2020) addressing the underlying belief system of the war on math: “knowledge is a social construct; science and reason are tools of oppression; all human interactions are sites of oppressive power play; and language is dangerous.” The bizarre tricks that critical theorists use to try to make 2+2 come out to 5 underline a lack of acceptance of the need for rigorous thinking.
Thus, when Brooklyn College Professor of Math Education Laurie Rubel announced in early August that 2+2=4 “reeks of white supremacist patriarchy,” she was speaking for surprising numbers of academics and teachers. Many rightly ask, what about the disadvantaged children who depend on public schools to provide basic literacy and numeracy skills? Well, there are two ways of looking at that. One would be to emphasize the skills; the other would be to undermine their value across society. Critical theory is firmly decided on the latter.
Is there a way of critiquing this mass flight from fact? In the current environment, that’s harder than some might think. For example, in an excerpt from Cynical Theories, Pluckrose and Lindsay note that the new progressive theory explains too much: “It reduces everything to one single variable, one single topic of conversation, one single focus and interpretation: prejudice, as understood under the power dynamics asserted by Theory.”
But why should that be seen as a problem when it is precisely the intention? They then argue, “The entire backbone of the theory is affirming the consequent. True logical statement: if there’s prejudice, then there’s disparity. Logical fallacy: there’s disparity, so there’s prejudice.” But, with the abolition of logic, logical fallacies are no longer a problem. People who don’t accept fallacies, however, are a problem.
Douglas Murray sums up the current situation:
When do you come to realise that a movement has made a clean sweep through the culture? It isn’t the moment when the disciplines that you know succumb to it. It isn’t when the ideas that you are familiar with suffer from the contamination. Rather it is when subjects you took to be serious, solid and immune from such things end up spouting exactly the same degraded mantras as everyone else.
DOUGLAS MURRAY, “WILL MATHS SUCCUMB TO THE WOKE WAVE?” AT UNHERD (OCTOBER 4, 2019)
Part of the problem may be that the very nature of mathematics is problematic in a naturalist (nature is all there is) environment. Philosopher Edward Feser puts it this way:
Mathematics appears to describe a realm of entities with quasi–divine attributes. The series of natural numbers is infinite. That one and one equal two and two and two equal four could not have been otherwise. Such mathematical truths never begin being true or cease being true; they hold eternally and immutably. The lines, planes, and figures studied by the geometer have a kind of perfection that the objects of our experience lack.”[12]
EDWARD FESER, “KEEP IT SIMPLE” AT FIRST THINGS (APRIL 2020)
That realm — recognized across the world — is increasingly seen as a problem at universities today. One commentator quoted G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936), “We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green.” (Kurt Mahlberg, MercatorNet, August 19, 2020)
Orwell’s hapless central character in 1984, the one who insisted that 2+2=4, was named Winston. If universities come to be dominated by critical theorists in all disciplines, they will not be slow to deal with the Winstons who show any attachment to fundamental facts, let alone eternal truths.
Note: The information is from Greg Piper, “Professor proposes ‘mathematx’ to fix pro-human bias in math,” The College Fix (August 21, 2018): It is not clear whether Gutierrez gave the presentation because the conference page no longer exists. But she is prolific within the discipline, as a list of her publications demonstrates.
 
Do góry Bottom