Post by thread:[OT:] Re: Where can I find Knoppics ?

On Jul 28, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > No PIC stuff, this copy was created by a collegue for teaching C to > freshman programmers. For the PIC class next season we will use > Windoze/MPLAB on PCs that can be re-installed with a prepared image. > Which will probably need to be done each night. I hope you're kidding about that last line. Let me get this straight... you're teaching kids to program (future engineers and scientists) that are going to either intentionally or unintentionally screw up their Windows machines beyond the point of repair daily? And then you're going to fix it for them? I don't want kids that need your level of handholding with their PC's working anywhere near any of my projects! If they can't safely use a PC, they shouldn't be ready for a class on embedded programming! And if they can't learn how to fix their own tools -- same sentiment. They're going to have to do that in the real world. Maybe even on their first day on the job! If they're being malicious... "Anyone screws up a machine intentionally -- you're fired, since this classroom is your job, you'll be given a failing grade and will be told to leave for the rest of the semester, with no chance of appeal. Welcome to the real world, kids. You will either act like professionals or you won't be here. If you have questions or need additional computer help, say so NOW." Teach them some responsibility -- by taking the time/effort to re-image the machines that often, you put yourself in the same (wrong) position many IT departments try to fill... PC baby-sitter. Do them a favor and teach them the proper care and feeding of their tools... just like a carpenter or a a plumber, or any other tradesman. Then keep the PC rescue image in your "back pocket" for the few machines that actually go down. ;-) -- Nate Duehr, spam_OUTnateTakeThisOuTnatetech.com -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email .....listservKILLspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

My electronics teacher would threaten with Grob (the auther of the textbook that we rarely used as more than a reference). If you treated the lab equipment badly you did the next chapter (or rest of the year) from the book with no hands on, and were graded from textbook quizes and homework. I can't remember anyone messing around more than once... -Adam Nate Duehr wrote: {Quote hidden}> On Jul 28, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: > >> No PIC stuff, this copy was created by a collegue for teaching C to >> freshman programmers. For the PIC class next season we will use >> Windoze/MPLAB on PCs that can be re-installed with a prepared image. >> Which will probably need to be done each night. > > > I hope you're kidding about that last line. > > Let me get this straight... you're teaching kids to program (future > engineers and scientists) that are going to either intentionally or > unintentionally screw up their Windows machines beyond the point of > repair daily? And then you're going to fix it for them? I don't want > kids that need your level of handholding with their PC's working > anywhere near any of my projects! If they can't safely use a PC, they > shouldn't be ready for a class on embedded programming! And if they > can't learn how to fix their own tools -- same sentiment. They're > going to have to do that in the real world. Maybe even on their first > day on the job! > > If they're being malicious... "Anyone screws up a machine intentionally > -- you're fired, since this classroom is your job, you'll be given a > failing grade and will be told to leave for the rest of the semester, > with no chance of appeal. Welcome to the real world, kids. You will > either act like professionals or you won't be here. If you have > questions or need additional computer help, say so NOW." > > Teach them some responsibility -- by taking the time/effort to re-image > the machines that often, you put yourself in the same (wrong) position > many IT departments try to fill... PC baby-sitter. Do them a favor and > teach them the proper care and feeding of their tools... just like a > carpenter or a a plumber, or any other tradesman. > > Then keep the PC rescue image in your "back pocket" for the few > machines that actually go down. ;-) > > -- > Nate Duehr, nateKILLspamnatetech.com > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email .....listservKILLspam.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > > -- http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! email EraseMElistservspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

On Jul 29, 2004, at 3:29 PM, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: {Quote hidden}>>> No PIC stuff, this copy was created by a collegue for teaching C to >>> freshman programmers. For the PIC class next season we will use >>> Windoze/MPLAB on PCs that can be re-installed with a prepared image. >>> Which will probably need to be done each night. >> >> I hope you're kidding about that last line. >> >> Let me get this straight... you're teaching kids to program (future >> engineers and scientists) that are going to either intentionally or >> unintentionally screw up their Windows machines beyond the point of >> repair daily? > > Knowing what students are they will probably try, and knowing what > windows is they will probably do it without intent. I use Netscape > because I can't figure out how to convince IE to connect to the web via > my network, and I am supposed to know something about computers. > >> And then you're going to fix it for them? > > Actually I want the PCs working for my class, whatever was done with > them yesterday. And the next-day teacher wants the same (for a > different > class). > >> They're >> going to have to do that in the real world. Maybe even on their first >> day on the job! > > This class is supposed to teach assembly to students that have never > used anything but Java (and a little C) before. If I wanted a class on > PC maintenance or tool exploration I would want a fresh clean PC to > start with, so I'd use the overnight reinstall anayway, but with a > different image. NB this system allows for a differnt image for each > class. > >> -- you're fired, since this classroom is your job, you'll be given a >> failing grade and will be told to leave for the rest of the semester, >> with no chance of appeal. > > But I'd have to figure out who did it. > > OK, I was kidding somewhat, but it I definitely like the idea that > whatever was done to the PCs the previous day, I know they will work > when I start my class. > > Wouter van Ooijen Oh well, I think my point was that it's a lot of work, and probably won't be all that effective due to the amount of time it will take to reimage the systems every day. It also puts an un-due load on you as the teacher to have to play "IT department". I try to follow a rule that usually works pretty well... fix human problems with humans, fix technology problems with computers. You have a little of both going on: 1. Technology problem is that the OS can't easily be sufficiently locked down to keep a neophyte from damaging it. There are applications out there that do it, but they're not cheap -- and they are usually used by places like schools and universities on a site-wide licensing basis. 2. The human problem is the students doing things they "shouldn't"... and to fix that the only real solution is: a. communication of the "rules" b. serious repercussions when they don't follow previously stated rules. Just like society. It's the best that society has come up with that works in thousands of years... I always get a kick out of us techies trying to beat it. ;-) Especially since the OS (see item #1) wasn't designed with that type of security as a goal. Heh. You might be able to find some relatively inexpensive add-on software that would lock-down the machines, I don't know... but I know places like call centers and other places of work where the PC is considered an appliance just to run a few well-defined applications and nothing more have had such software for a long time now. Depending on how long your school has had PC's, they really should have a handle on that by now... a college I attended in 1993 did and it was (mostly) effective at keeping students from messing up the Windows machines. Of course, the Unix machines were kept aside for "advanced" students who supposedly already knew better by the time they got to work on the fancy Sun boxen... ha! And no, nothing they did stopped someone I knew from compiling nmap from source on the VAX and portscanning the entire internal Class-B network! Heh... but they did take away her account for a semester. Actions/Consequences... Oh ... another thought came to mind... will the software you're using run on a Windows Terminal Server? You could load it on a centralized machine and have the students just pull up virtual sessions from whatever messed-up goofed-up PC's they happen to be sitting at... at least their build environment would be "relatively safe" over on the central box... and you'd have logging of "who did what". -- Nate Duehr, KILLspamnateKILLspamnatetech.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

On Jul 29, 2004, at 4:44 PM, Nate Duehr wrote: >>>> For the PIC class next season we will use Windoze/MPLAB on PCs >>>> that can be re-installed with a prepared image. >>>> At ESC a couple years ago, microsoft and/or microchip were doing that on the PCs they were teaching classes on. Quite an eye opener... > Oh well, I think my point was that it's a lot of work, and probably > won't be all that effective due to the amount of time it will take to > reimage the systems every day. > But it's NOT a lot of work. It's MUCH less work than monitoring PCs for damage, much less figuring out how to fix them. Norton ghost or the equivalent can re-image a PC (with a smallish installation and application suite) from a CD in 10 minutes or less, without attention. (and for all we make fun of them, there's a reason that the average IT reaction to a system acting weirdly is to re-image and start over... It's tough to keep track of what happens even when everyone acts with the best of intentions.) BillW -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

>Well, yeah. There are (at least) two kinds of eye openers: one has you >saying "gee, that's clever, I never would have thought of that", and >the other has you saying "Doh! That's obvious! Why didn't I think of >that?" Well, I believe that with 6 billion people trying to to make a living on this rock, whatever you think of will have been ruminated by hundreds of people in a better position than you (or me) to make a honest dime out of it, up to 200 years (or 2000 ?) previously. But then, maybe you can opportunistically win, like in the Whist card game (playing the zero), so why not follow the M$ lead, and rush and patent it asap, hoping for the best. If nothing else, you could get the satisfaction of a five-year-long lawsuit that will leave everybody participating bankrupt, make headlines for 5 years in countries as far removed as China and Bhutan, and have everyone satisfied that they played it by someone else's rules and both sides lost (the lawyers will be happy too). >My mindset wasn't hitting the idea of "wasting" effort to re-image the >disks just because something "might" be wrong. Unix used to be ported to production machines as image *only* for a while because rebuilding it on a target machine would have taken weeks. Afaik. I still have 'operational' 386SX computers which take about 8 hours to compile a (1.2.13) Linux kernel, assuming they have the disk space. Can you see a customer do that ? I can't. This also holds true for most embedded/cross compiled systems out there, including most play station and netwinder type machines. So Unix had a certain lead in this domain (say, 35 years, give or take a little). Come to think of it, transferring a binary executable image to a pic is 'imaging'. It is interesting to note that M$ Frowned Strongly on imaging some time ago (years - search news for references), when they found out that big companies IT departments would do just that (imaging) to keep their ever-freezing workstations going, and in the process looked the other way when the number of licenses did not quite tally with the number of workstations. Peter PS: My favorite saying these days is, He who ignoreth the mistakes of his forebears be condemned to repeat them (or roughly along these lines). Incidentally, imaging is no longer used by Unix systems. It is only used on dual boot machines to recover the functionality of legacy 'operating systems', using the OS that still works (usually a *nix variant) ;-) -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.