Using RSS

Sick of facebook deciding what you get to read from your favourite websites? Wish you could be informed of every single post so you don’t miss anything? Then step back in time and find out a little about RSS, a simple and reliable way to keep on top of posts.

Of course, it depends on websites supporting RSS, but a surprising number do (given that it’s trivial to set up), including The Moshville Times. And this one.

I use Feedly as my RSS reader. It’s accessible via the web or an app. The free account limits you to 100 feeds, which should be plenty to get you going.

Alternatively, there’s the Vivaldi web browser which has an RSS module built into its email client as of recently, though it’s still a little clunky. Those of you using Outlook (the full app) can also make use of its inbuilt RSS reader.

There are others, too. A quick Google turned up this article which lists another four.

Once you have your reader, it’s usually as simple as entering the URL of your chosen website into it. The reader will locate the RSS feed and add it as a subscription. Worst case you may need to locate the site’s feed yourself, but it should be a simple matter of looking down the sidebar for “RSS” or the logo seen above. Copy the link and use that.

Then just set notifications, if needs be, or check your reader when you want to catch up. You won’t miss a post from your chosen websites again! No stupid algorithm, no 2-day delay until the site decides that it’s your turn to read something.

2019 Pic 33

I may be alone in the flat, but I’m alone with two screens now that I’ve dug out the old desk and have more space to spread everything out. I do need to replace at least one of them as the image quality has deteriorated a lot but for the moment I can now get through things a little more easily. Watch my productivity soar! Or at least I’ll get through more TV while I’m working.

Computing – the fourth science

This was a facebook post, but I’d like to expand on it here:

I’ve just checked our school leavers’ destinations for last year. We had 16 going into medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, pharmacology or veterinary science.

We had ten going into software engineering, computer science, AI, robotics or related subjects where Computing would be an essential or near-essential skill (including one Maths/Physics pupil in there).

I have been very generous in what I consider a “medical” subject and quite strict on the computer-relates ones. We’re looking at something not that far away from a 1:1 relationship between the two overall, depending on how you view the courses.

Image courtesy of Wikipedia
Image courtesy of Wikipedia

Not even considering how useful basic Computing would be for anyone doing engineering, chemical engineering, bio-tech, or indeed the medically-related subjects… would someone kindly explain to me why parents still think their children “have” to do Biology, Chemistry and Physics to get into Medicine et al? Especially when university entry requirements haven’t asked for this triplet for many years?

Yes, I’m selling my own subject. I just want to know why I need to when the advantages of it are so flipping obvious to so many pupils.

I was speaking to a parent recently who finished her PhD a short while ago and she can’t understand why Computing isn’t encouraged more by schools. Her subject was Genetics and there was no way she could have done the work she did without the aid of computers and knowing how to use them.

Yes, there’s a definite gap between “using a computer” and “knowing how it works and how to program one”, but there’s also a big common ground where the skills picked up would be useful for so many other areas of life/study.

Take the Software Development Process, for example. It teaches how to approach a large problem, break it down into smaller ones, plan each section appropriately, distribute these small problems to multiple people (if required), get the parts made, test them thoroughly, document everything, evaluate the finished product and maintain it afterwards.

This procedure can be applied to so many other skills: essay writing, laboratory experiments, household projects, business plans… it just needs a little bit of tweaking. To the best of my knowledge, with the exception of CDT/”techie” we’re the only subject that teaches this structured approach to problem-solving. Not only do we teach it, it’s entrenched in the ethos of computing and forms the framework of the course from junior years right through to senior. It’s not just an exam topic.

Computers are in use in all walks of life and knowing how they work helps you when you’re dealing with them. If you know what they can do and roughly how they do it, then it makes it easier for you to communicate to an expert exactly what you require if the actual task is outside of your skill set. This would be incredibly useful for those doing any scientific university course as they rely so heavily on information-gathering and, indeed, automation of experimental procedure. Automated and monitored by, of course, computers.

We’ve had pupils who’ve told us in their first year that they’re not taking Computing because they’re going into Medicine and their parents have said that Computing is pointless. This angers me. A good Computing pass further up the school is as valuable as any other for university entry and equally as useful for getting onto Medicine. In First Year you don’t even know what your child’s strengths truly are and by telling them they won’t be taking the course at certificate level in two years you’re hamstringing them – they won’t try, so they won’t achieve their potential. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You could be pushing them to do a subject they struggle at, when they could be a natural nerd who could get a far easier “A” in Computing… and still get onto a medical course at university.

Computing is a science. In fact the course – right through from the beginning of the certificate route in schools to the end – has recently been renamed “Computing Science” in Scotland to reflect this. What more do we need to do to make parents, and indeed those within schools who sort out the timetable, realise that Computing Science is comparable to the “classic” sciences in terms of academic value?