Slashdot Mirror

But I don't see anyone banning Che Guevara shirts.

You are either joking or seriously comparing Che Guevara shirts to death threats which, ironically, is also a joke because the comparison is so stupid. If you want to stick it to the Che Guevara shirt wearing latte slurping hipsters you can always invest in one of these: https://fineartamerica.com/fea... I bet you don't have the guts to wear it in public.

Trump is working under the worst conditions a president has ever had. The media is all out against him from the get go, biased to hell. The left refuses to even acknowledged he won and is an impediment to progress at every turn.

Your "liberals" are NOT IN POWER. Please get at least that one thing straight. Republicans control the House and Senate, case closed. Trump's failures to date are on them, not some "liberal" media.

That's Trump's own Party, supposed to be his friends, and they could care less about some "media... all out against him from the get go". They regularly bash this "biased" media of yours.

Yet even John McCain gives the thumbs-down to Trump. Why? Chiefly, because Trump picks fights with leaders of his own Party. Nevermind whatever views or causes he may or may not have, bottom-line Trump can't behave like a grown-up. That makes for great TV, and maybe it makes some people feel good ("Yeah! You tell 'em Trump!") but it doesn't get anything done.

Trump supporters need to stop asking whether they love the way-so-awesome tough shit he says and tweets, and instead ask whether they'd trust him enough, honest to God, to pay cash to buy a used car from him. Seriously. Be honest. Would you buy a used car from that man? It's the greatest, let me tell you, and don't believe those lies from the liberals at the CarFax - they're losers, this ride has never been in no accident, never been totaled, that puddle of oil is from something else, believe me.

AT&T built a PicturePhone in 1964. They did market research, and most people said they would find it useful.

When they released it, no one bought it. Moral of the story: market research isn't always right. But anyone who thought video phones would be popular was failing to learn from the lessons of the past.

Can someone explain what is happening in that video? I see some children, and an old guy ducking down below then, and someone setting up some piece of equipment I don't recognize. Call me naive, call me stupid, whatever: but seriously, please explain.

The kindhearted individual in the front at 0:08 drops a sizable mortar down a mortar tube and runs for the hills. The next :20 consist of the children and old guy waiting for the mortar to drop the length of the tube and the time delay fuse to expire. At 0:28 the mortar fires, apparently correctly, launching the mortar in the general direction of the kindhearted individual's target.

Of course, if the mortar fired incorrectly or exploded within the tube, that clearly visible collection of children would likely be within the shrapnel zone. Funny how the old guy appears to be keeping them there.

Also of course, if you want to destory the mortar, you're faced the with small problem that you have children gathered within the blast radius of your tank shell, opposing mortar, guided demolition unit (a.k.a air-dropped bomb), or the like.

So that would be what's happening in that video.

The set up and take-down time for that mortar system are also substantially longer than the recorded :30.

I don't know if the guy is full of shit or not... but, I did my own google search.

I found that:
1. He wrote a book that was well received about his injury, though complaints were that it was overly wordy. There were several people that claimed to be mathematicians that reviewed it and said his area of specialty was fractal geometry and that he was so specialized it was uninteresting to them. He was basically obsessed with 1 aspect of geometry.
2. He is an artist, and makes Fractal art. Not that his stuff is that incredible but I doubt a furniture salesman could pull this off. http://fineartamerica.com/prof...
3. Here's photos of him. One includes his doctor: http://www.struckbygenius.com/...
4. That doctors name is Darold Treffert who appears to be am expert on Savant Syndrome. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

So it appears to me that the guy actually did develop some Savant abilities. I don't know if he got them from an injury or not. But it appears that those abilities are so specialized that they may not be useful in an academic sense. If he can visualize incredibly complex geometries but can not, for example, do long division, his skill wouldn't really lead him to write a lot of papers.

Some things never really change, do they?

Statistically, it doesn't matter. When people run polls, how do they know how many people are lying to them? That's why they use large samples, so the signal can rise above the noise.

Interesting point, but let's be clear. If I happen to be a politician and want to make the economy look good, would I poll every citizen in the US for their feelings on the economy? I believe that I would I target people that are employed, working in particular fields, living in certain types of neighborhoods. This is how statistics are done used to present an invalid/biased view of the world. Anyone believing that the economy is healthy in the US is an idiot, but politicians can show you this all day long with statistical backing. Statistics rarely show the truth of things, so invalid example all the way around.

You'd be extremely unlikely to do so, and even if you did, as long as you sample enough zebra paintings, its noise would be swamped by the signal. Most zebra paintings would show a realistic, if not 100% accurate, size and number of stripes, especially if the artist could look out of his window and see a zebra.

Nope, sorry. You seem to be very ignorant about art and a quick Google search yields how wrong you are. "Realism" is not even audible noise in the traffic, it barely exists.

My understanding of the paper is that they looked not only at red/green ratios per painting, but also red/green ratio changes within the painting. That will have removed some of the kind of uncertainty you're talking about.

Did you do any of my suggested study on paints? Here is a primer, then go look at Audion's paintings and see how the colors vary from picture to picture. Dilution causes variances as does ingredients. This is not the artist capturing the 'real color of the sky', but the artist mixing paints for the effect they desire.

There are thousands of references to why artists strive for emotion in paintings, not realism. There is almost no information on why artists strive for realism without emotion. People that teach artists will tell you never put realism above emotion. This is not just the abstract, but people painting family pictures. Here is yet another quick Google result.