I’m interested in your opinion here. Will you elaborate and cite an example an example to justify your opinion?

Certainly the test is not the be all end all, other factors are important. Grades, recommendation letters, activities, and an understanding of the students background.

However it can help us evaluate who is able to perform in a higher learning environment and that they have the knowledge to study advanced degrees. I had 4 standardized tests in my educational career, 4th grade state test, 10th grade state test, ACT and GRE. Only 2 of those were non-repeatable. How many do students take these days?

We’re about to see an end to standardized tests for college admissions. This is paving the way for discrimination against good students who wish to attend elite universities. Currently elite universities ideas of diversity and “personality” are more important than upholding educational standards.

It is simply wrong to evaluate and condemn a person based on race. To justify any kind of discrimination on the idea that you are helping one person, you are hurting another. This an equally problematic, it’s taking us back to times before equal rights and for people to be judged on their abilities.

Hoping a brilliant student will apply to a university twice and deepfake their race in one of their admission interview videos.

How do you differentiate a good student as in a bright individual who has good grades but who doesn't "prepare" continuously versus a very good test taker and ambitions in this test taking sense and who is also able to prepare for any type of standardized test and ace them but, not as bright as the former? Surely not by race, that's no fun but standardized tests can be gamed and that was not their intention.

By making the standardized tests not the sole criteria.

But how can they ensure that part cannot be gamed though? By choosing something non objective, this giving a little opening for inept but rich students? I understand that their funding is needed so why don’t they make a clear standard as in 1M donation or whatever is expected of these silverspoons?

The more criteria are used, the harder it will be to game, as you'd have to game all of them.

Why do good students have more of a right to attend elite colleges than other students?

Why don’t we prefer hard working students or students that played the most sports? There’s nothing inherently special about being a good student.

Because it can't be elite its filled with people who are mediocre. It's in the name... elite. Everytime you just let someone in on some flimsy diversity grounds you debase degree.

It’s not in the name. The presumption is that elite means other good students, and not the school itself.

When I buy elite golf clubs, it means the clubs are elite not other people who buy it are.

Now you can argue part of the reason to attend college is because of your classmates. And then I’d ask is the best experience a bunch of kids who are simply good at school?

The people who wanted power have it now, and they love wielding it. If they relent, the perception becomes that it never mattered in the first place. Lockdown makes them heroes and wise politicians, saving you from something that we know very little about.

Heroes? Name one "powerful" person who is a hero in this pandemic. I can't think of any. Cuomo was quite effective with his daily briefings but made so many other basic mistakes before and after the core part of the NY "wave" that even that performance didn't turn him into a hero. I haven't see a single wise politician, let alone a hero, within the USA with regards to COVID19.

C4D is beautiful software - Blender is making strides, maybe 3 years it would take, but Blender is in feature acquisition mode, not improving the codebase/current functionality.

C4D is really good and Maxon has been decent in making updates for it imo. They are listening to their users and updating stuff, even if more slowly than people would like.

They’ve also done of the best lateral moves of all time by buying Redshift, which is slowly becoming a serious production renderer second only to Arnold imo.

I have no idea why people have such strong reactions against the subscription model - first of all you can still purchase a permanent license of C4D, second of all, the sub model is way cheaper and actually helped me a ton since I live in a poorer country.

I don't really have anything against it per se. It just had that Autodesk / Adobe feel to it that immediately provokes a kicking and screaming reaction in many :)

Maybe we shouldn’t use Ai for anything in critical situations. Perhaps there is no perfect model for AI training. Nuance is valuable and perhaps current AI systems are not valid answers to the problems we face. Money will say otherwise but it’s hard to support these kinds of solutions. Better trained people are a solution that is unpopular currently.

If you’re U.S. based you may have free access to the NYT and other paywall ed news sources through your library. Usually they call it e-media and you can access news sources and magazines from across the nation and around the world. Hopefully your city library has e-resources you can take advantage of and participate more fully in the conversation.

So the absolute truth is on Twitter? How significant is the portion of uninformed Americans? If an American watches TV news and reads Twitter are they half informed? WTF is your point: blame others, hate others, downvoting to remove a disparaging opinion. Do you feel powerful? You might be the cop.

>refuses to spend extra time looking at other sources, like Twitter.

Twitter as another resource was an example. But yes, you can look on Twitter and find many different perspectives about a topic. I would think someone who knows how to spend some time understanding multiple perspectives of an issue knows how to look in many different places for them.

As far as the rest of your comment, I think you're going way off-base here. Sorry.