Stephen Checkoway
@stevecheckoway.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Computer Science at Oberlin College. No kings, no nazis.
Ah gotcha. Less wild than I expected based on my misunderstanding but it’s still surprising they don’t respond.
December 3, 2025 at 4:00 AM
Ah gotcha. Less wild than I expected based on my misunderstanding but it’s still surprising they don’t respond.
That’s wild! At Oberlin, our Office of Disability and Accessibility handles all accommodation requests. I receive a letter from them detailing the accommodations and then I meet with the student to discuss, if there’s a need.
December 3, 2025 at 3:45 AM
That’s wild! At Oberlin, our Office of Disability and Accessibility handles all accommodation requests. I receive a letter from them detailing the accommodations and then I meet with the student to discuss, if there’s a need.
Sorry, relevant and necessary.
December 2, 2025 at 7:56 AM
Sorry, relevant and necessary.
Perhaps I was unclear. If so apologies. The necessary and required bit that I quoted was all I was saying applied to all content.
That said, I’m not sure I follow your distinction between “must follow” and “must adhere to.”
That said, I’m not sure I follow your distinction between “must follow” and “must adhere to.”
December 2, 2025 at 7:55 AM
Perhaps I was unclear. If so apologies. The necessary and required bit that I quoted was all I was saying applied to all content.
That said, I’m not sure I follow your distinction between “must follow” and “must adhere to.”
That said, I’m not sure I follow your distinction between “must follow” and “must adhere to.”
And indeed the “necessary and relevant” portion applies to all content.
December 2, 2025 at 5:09 AM
And indeed the “necessary and relevant” portion applies to all content.
“It should also be noted that, in addition to the three categories listed above, faculty members must adhere to the general standard of only utilizing course content that is relevant and necessary for classroom instruction.” So “relevant and necessary” seems to apply to all content.
December 2, 2025 at 5:06 AM
“It should also be noted that, in addition to the three categories listed above, faculty members must adhere to the general standard of only utilizing course content that is relevant and necessary for classroom instruction.” So “relevant and necessary” seems to apply to all content.
Important context. I should have read the memo. bsky.app/profile/mike...
fwiw, I initially read this as meaning *any* content, but if I read the associated memo correctly it is only content related to "war on woke" stuff, which is very bad to treat this way, but not the level of control I think some reposting this believe is in force
TX Tech has a flow chat for guidance on what can be taught in the university system. Two things:
1. Very little content seems to be permitted. This is partisan control of the curriculum.
2. I would not enjoy teaching under these conditions, but I really would not want to be a Chair or Dean.
1. Very little content seems to be permitted. This is partisan control of the curriculum.
2. I would not enjoy teaching under these conditions, but I really would not want to be a Chair or Dean.
December 2, 2025 at 5:01 AM
Important context. I should have read the memo. bsky.app/profile/mike...
Got it, thanks.
I’m a little surprised by that. Naively, I’d expect either (a) someone else filing on your behalf to be a normal, expected, and supported operation; or (b) using someone else’s account to be inappropriate like forging a signature.
Interesting that neither is the case.
I’m a little surprised by that. Naively, I’d expect either (a) someone else filing on your behalf to be a normal, expected, and supported operation; or (b) using someone else’s account to be inappropriate like forging a signature.
Interesting that neither is the case.
December 2, 2025 at 12:15 AM
Got it, thanks.
I’m a little surprised by that. Naively, I’d expect either (a) someone else filing on your behalf to be a normal, expected, and supported operation; or (b) using someone else’s account to be inappropriate like forging a signature.
Interesting that neither is the case.
I’m a little surprised by that. Naively, I’d expect either (a) someone else filing on your behalf to be a normal, expected, and supported operation; or (b) using someone else’s account to be inappropriate like forging a signature.
Interesting that neither is the case.
Serious question: why do the associates/paralegals not have their own accounts? Is that just not something supported by the filing system?
December 1, 2025 at 10:52 PM
Serious question: why do the associates/paralegals not have their own accounts? Is that just not something supported by the filing system?
I didn't expect the quotes to make it into the output. I guess I should have but I've never seen the $(file) construct before debugging this Makefile.
November 24, 2025 at 6:17 PM
I didn't expect the quotes to make it into the output. I guess I should have but I've never seen the $(file) construct before debugging this Makefile.
It gives no errors with the make that comes with macOS. Instead, it just does nothing.
Install a newer make and:
$ make
make: 'blarg' is up to date.
$ cat blarg
"Let's see some text!"
Install a newer make and:
$ make
make: 'blarg' is up to date.
$ cat blarg
"Let's see some text!"
November 24, 2025 at 6:15 PM
It gives no errors with the make that comes with macOS. Instead, it just does nothing.
Install a newer make and:
$ make
make: 'blarg' is up to date.
$ cat blarg
"Let's see some text!"
Install a newer make and:
$ make
make: 'blarg' is up to date.
$ cat blarg
"Let's see some text!"