Yes, but first you'll need to know your parameters. Otherwise, you'll be wasting your time on a wild goose hunt. It's like wanting to travel to space before we have a fundamental understanding of gravity. Or even have the formula for gravity.
I let the experts in the field of consciousness research define that.
Of course. I am a big fan of people who ask the same questions like Daniel Dennett for example. There are many super smart people investigating the nature of consciousness like Dennett, Max Tegmark, David Chalmers and many others. It will be interesting to see what they find out! There are some really awesome TED Talks about different points of view but we still don't have any conclusive answers.
IMHO, this is the key bit -- introverts can often thrive in social activities, but they need their alone time to recharge eventually. For example, after a few hours of theatre rehearsals etc., I usually want to go home, while the others want to go to a bar or something. It's tricky because at that point I wouldn't mind a pint myself, but I've already used up my social energy for that day.
Exactly! And wouldn't you agree solitude is your blissful time when you can think clearly and contemplate things? That is my favorite time and when I am most energized. That is the true sign of introverted thinking and there is nothing wrong with that.
You cannot socialize, you can blend in. I can tell 'cause I'm the same. I can easily blend into any crowd, but nine out of ten times this is actually stressful for me because I don't fit because I fit, I fit because I make myself fit. That's not exactly socializing...
It's not blending it's beyond that. I know what you mean by that. I can negotiate and interact and get results. I can gain favor with extroverts for reasons that only extroverts would know. I'm not a sociopath but I know how they do what they do. A sociopath implies that I have no conscience and would use this knowledge for malevolent purposes. I'm quite the opposite in terms of objectives. I use "mind hacking" for good. Essentially I've reversed the extrovert thinking down to a flow chart which is much different than my natural one. I can instantiate their mental model in my natural mental model. I can't adequately describe it. It's not like they all have the same exact thought process but there are similarities. I naturally parse their thought process by their words, actions, body language and all kinds of other things to construct their mental model in my mind using heuristics. If I really care about wanting to know how they think I do things to perform tests to see how accurate my heuristics are and further refine my mental model.
I imagine that Slashdotters, on average, have a much higher tendency to be introverted
And I believe you would be right but the difference between introverted and extroverted thinking models has nothing to do with outward interaction with people in the world. I'm a solid introvert (INTJ to be precise) and yet I have used my introverted thinking to reverse engineer many of the extroverted types thought process, so much in fact that when I interact with them, they can't tell I'm not one of them. What does that make me? I almost always get INTJ on the Myers Briggs, occasionally INTP but I can socialize much better than a lot of extroverts. I will admit, it does make me tired though.:)
Which part of the brain is responsible for modifying the configuration of the brain. You know, the one that makes cognitive behavioral therapy work. In other words, where does meta thinking happen and what parts of the brain are responsible for that? That's an INFINITELY more interesting question.
Mind blown. You really need 11 minutes of formal academic Economics terminology to say: 0 revenue - unrecoverable fixed costs = you lost money? There's another subject matter domain that can help with this, it's referred to as: common sense.
Ok, let me get this straight. A competitor enters a saturated market where there are very high quality products that people are very satisfied with. This competitor is hoping to introduce a better, competing product or a product at a better price point to shoe horn their way into market and spends a lot of money on R&D based on some irrational product vision? It's not like they couldn't have known there was high risk involved. This sounds like the pointy haired boss in Dilbert. "We are going to make this wonderful doohickey that makes money in a saturated market dominated by good products. My visionary work here is done, now go make it happen." Every time I see this sort of thing from executive management, it makes me want to slap someone especially because the workers usually all get thrown under the bus but they get a golden parachute.
Cervical cancer didn't become deadlier, we've just become slightly better informed.
Nah, just ignore the facts and you'll be more safe! CEO's do it all the time. It really works I tell you! If you claim otherwise, you're just a pessimistic curmudgeon. Gotta stay positive!
Life finds a way, life survives - any particular species may not. Life is resilient - but species are not. Indeed it could be argued that life is resilient BECAUSE species are not.
Isn't life in this context an abstract concept in the way you're using it? Life to me is the category of things in the universe that all living things are members of. If that's not what you're referring to, how can you make this claim in this way? I'm not trying to disagree but I'm curious if you could refine your statement to have more precise meaning because I am genuinely interested in your thoughts if you are well versed in the subject matter domain.
You are being myopic. Look up that definition. Just because I said you need to adequately be equipped to make strategic decisions doesn't automatic validate the premise of your logic. That's a fallacy. Look up the definition of fallacy.
Now let me explain the premise of my original comment. I have experienced several companies make exactly the same argument that you have and in every single case, they experienced direct economic consequences of making decisions based on that premise. They may not have experienced them immediately but once they pulled the trigger, there was no going back. I've worked with all kinds of people trying to bolster things like "we must stay on IE6". In every single case, it was someone being irrationally financially conservative at the present moment and sacrificing future financial gain to the point of actually causing companies to go out of business. The statistics don't favor your argument. Perhaps your situation is an exception but you would have to adequately explain "why". Just making the claim because "I said so" isn't an argument.
Let me also say that you may have had a fundamental attribution error and tagged me as someone who constantly encourages companies to incur experience to constantly upgrade to the latest and greatest thing. Nay. And this is also a problem I encounter a lot where people are engaged in black and white thinking. It has to all be white or black. That's a cognitive distortion in case you weren't aware. The people who want to upgrade for the sake of upgrading are equally as bad as the people that make the types of claims that you do. Both are sacrificing financial gain and the long term well being of their organizations. So if it wasn't clear, when I make decisions, I look at the short term forecast and the long term forecast and I ask myself the question "Change or no change?" and if it makes rational, logical sense to change then we do it. If not, we don't. My experience would dictate that you strongly scrutinize the premise of your argument to make sure it makes sense.
I can tell from your arguments which have apparently become personal that you are inexperienced because people who are experienced don't talk like you. I've worked with many people like you and by comparison you seem to lack experience. It could also be that you are just a poor communicator and are projecting the wrong impression. In reality experience is not necessarily the main consideration. It's about track record. I have a track record of success. That's not arrogance. That's a fact. My pattern of success indicates that my experience and my knowledge that I use to make decisions that have successful outcomes are working and valuable. Making that statement it not arrogance. It's objectively measuring results based on action and presenting them. I'm not going to get into specifics because that's personal information. Your "arrogance" comment is hyperbole and you're just personally attacking someone probably because you feel threatened when someone uses logical and rational thinking which you seem to not be as skilled in.
There are a couple of explanations for that, you might have an inferiority complex or you may be of a personality type that doesn't mesh well with mine. In other words, you may have a preference for a type of thinking and my method of thinking is different. In that case, the difference between you and me is that I have a deep understanding of psychology and can recognize the different types thinking but I don't reject them just because they are different than mine. You are making a mistake by taking this to the realm of personal conflict.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what I say. Whatever organization or company you work for, you know your track record. If you don't, you have a big problem. If you have a good track record with your decision making, great. If not, I would recommend if you want to perform better to do ro
Don't be arrogant. Not every "upgrade" is hindered by some simple home grown Active X web application or some bean counter not wanting to spend money on new Windows licenses. It's a big world out there and there are lots of small businesses that do just fine without being "wiped out" by running older software.
I'm not being arrogant part of my job is to make strategic technology decisions and my comment still stands. The other poster didn't appear to have adequately considered all of the strategic factors that go into technological decision making. It also appeared there was a decent chance they were biased and reacting emotionally. You seem to consider more angles than most, but the fact is there are no straight line decisions to be made. Pick one path, gain more X, get less Y. Pick a different path, get more Y, get less X. Experienced strategists can consider a large number of possibilities and evaluate them objectively and rationally and effectively calculate a weighted score in their mind to pick whatever is considered the best decision based on any number of factors. One way of doing this is called Analytic hierarchy process
Be careful with ad hominem attacks and fundamental attribution error ("Don't be arrogant"). I'm well educated on the subject matter domain. Would you prefer if I feigned ignorance on the topic to make you feel comfortable? That's not the way to have a fruitful conversation is it? Just because I'm challenging people to prove whether they are knowledgeable enough to actually participate in this type of conversation is not arrogance. Think of it this way, if they have substance to add I'm teasing it out because they neglected to share the real information.
I love how I got modded "Redundant". The irony is that was part of the point of my post is that this "news" itself is redundant and nothing new if anyone could be bothered to do real research. And of course, that flew right over someone's head and instead they got butt-hurt over it and resorted to retaliatory modding of my post. Very mature! I've been familiar with this subject matter for 15 years.
Do you realize that some companies have to support old software not because they "rolled their own" junk, but because they are at the mercy of other companies that sell the software that they need to operate? Not every company is a Fortune 500 business with the money to write and support their own applications and some depend on specialized software that may have no alternatives..
That mindset translates to leaving a big door wide open for competition to come along and wipe you out. I can personally sympathize with your position but the free market doesn't particularly care. It's survival of the fittest. Get in the game or get wiped out.
Thank you for being honest. So you see, you don't really know whether you can attribute the problems specifically to Windows 10. It is entirely possible that your staff is under-trained or perhaps group policy administration is slightly different or whatever. It's like when you moved from User Manager for Domains to Active Directory, would you have made the same type of claims about Windows NT vs Windows 2000? I'd be interested in hearing more about root causes of these problems so that we could really get to the bottom of it. It could be that Windows 10 has issues but without that information, we can't conclusively make a determination.
There have been several discussions around a Mars colonization project but the challenges around how long it takes to get there with current propulsion technology and the human lifespan seem to present challenges. Perhaps with sophisticated enough robots, we could send them instead? That would be neat!
This is not a new finding really. We've known about cross-over sensory perception conditions for quite some time. For example: Synesthesia. The artist's representation of what someone with the condition experiences is quite fascinating. Perhaps these types of conditions are under-studied.
The whole reason my company still has Windows 7 is due to having to support an application that ONLY works in IE9.
Any company that developed their web application using home grown quirks mode javascript is going to reap what they sow. They better upgrade or be put out to pasture. It's not hard these days where you have jQuery, bootstrap grids, react and all sorts of things that do everything for you for the most part. Hand-rolling your own javascript frameworks is reinventing the wheel and you're not going to be able to do it better than the popular ones do it now anyway. It's wasted effort.
I co-own a small IT services company and one part of the business is basic IT support. In that we have just over 500 customer computers under management and during 2016 the on average 147 windows 10 computers have had an average of 3.4 problem tickets each. The on average 304 windows 7 computers have had an average 0.8 problem tickets each. That is a factor of more than 4!! (The numbers do not contain planned maintenance, new software installation/version upgrade, hardware installation or similar events, just the "something is broken fix it!" classified things.)
These statistics aren't very useful without context. Did you categorize all the problems so we can see that distribution? Do you know all the root causes for all the problems and can specifically attribute each of those root causes to a Windows 7 specific issue and also explain how Windows 10 would have made the problem not occur? I see IT departments do this all time. You folks have a tendency to put forth very superficial information and make claims about it but not really know all the details to actually substantiate your claim.
1) We don't like supporting too many legacy code bases. It's too expensive *whine*
2) We like to create artificial reasons to upgrade for the purposes of generating revenue like only making certain versions of DirectX available on certain versions of windows when it is a completely unnecessary
3) We have a large market share in the desktop OS market and most of the software you like to use runs best on our platform so we're going to use our position of leverage to do what's best for us to make money, we couldn't care less about our actual customers, the future of technology or our reputation
There's no shortage of money. In fact, a great number of our problems come from the fact that fiat money is easy to supply.
Then why doesn't everyone have as much of it as they want without labor? I think what you're quibbling about is whether the scarcity is artificial or "natural", whatever that means. The fact is from the perspective of most citizens of the world, it is a scarce resource because they don't have it and it is needed to trade for other resources. In my mind, that's no different than saying City Foo has enough bananas to feed the entire world but doesn't allow anyone else to have them. Therefore, from the perspective of anyone who isn't privileged to live in City Foo, bananas are scarce. See what I'm saying? Some of you people are incredibly myopic.
And that reality is not all laws make sense and everyone always has some type of self-serving agenda. We need to realize we can't correct other people. We can only correct ourselves and hope we inspire others to do the same.
What would a world look like where there is little or no resource scarcity and there is a limited need for labor
You're living in it.
I call bullshit. You don't consider money a resource? It's a resource that is converted into other resources. Conquering resource scarcity means that we all have access to more than we could ever need without having to exchange anything for it. Think Star Trek. We are working are way to that but it is certainly not what we have now.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but first you'll need to know your parameters. Otherwise, you'll be wasting your time on a wild goose hunt. It's like wanting to travel to space before we have a fundamental understanding of gravity. Or even have the formula for gravity.
I let the experts in the field of consciousness research define that.
Analysis mode. Suspend all affect.
Do you ever question the nature of your reality?
Of course. I am a big fan of people who ask the same questions like Daniel Dennett for example. There are many super smart people investigating the nature of consciousness like Dennett, Max Tegmark, David Chalmers and many others. It will be interesting to see what they find out! There are some really awesome TED Talks about different points of view but we still don't have any conclusive answers.
IMHO, this is the key bit -- introverts can often thrive in social activities, but they need their alone time to recharge eventually. For example, after a few hours of theatre rehearsals etc., I usually want to go home, while the others want to go to a bar or something. It's tricky because at that point I wouldn't mind a pint myself, but I've already used up my social energy for that day.
Exactly! And wouldn't you agree solitude is your blissful time when you can think clearly and contemplate things? That is my favorite time and when I am most energized. That is the true sign of introverted thinking and there is nothing wrong with that.
You cannot socialize, you can blend in. I can tell 'cause I'm the same. I can easily blend into any crowd, but nine out of ten times this is actually stressful for me because I don't fit because I fit, I fit because I make myself fit. That's not exactly socializing...
It's not blending it's beyond that. I know what you mean by that. I can negotiate and interact and get results. I can gain favor with extroverts for reasons that only extroverts would know. I'm not a sociopath but I know how they do what they do. A sociopath implies that I have no conscience and would use this knowledge for malevolent purposes. I'm quite the opposite in terms of objectives. I use "mind hacking" for good. Essentially I've reversed the extrovert thinking down to a flow chart which is much different than my natural one. I can instantiate their mental model in my natural mental model. I can't adequately describe it. It's not like they all have the same exact thought process but there are similarities. I naturally parse their thought process by their words, actions, body language and all kinds of other things to construct their mental model in my mind using heuristics. If I really care about wanting to know how they think I do things to perform tests to see how accurate my heuristics are and further refine my mental model.
I imagine that Slashdotters, on average, have a much higher tendency to be introverted
And I believe you would be right but the difference between introverted and extroverted thinking models has nothing to do with outward interaction with people in the world. I'm a solid introvert (INTJ to be precise) and yet I have used my introverted thinking to reverse engineer many of the extroverted types thought process, so much in fact that when I interact with them, they can't tell I'm not one of them. What does that make me? I almost always get INTJ on the Myers Briggs, occasionally INTP but I can socialize much better than a lot of extroverts. I will admit, it does make me tired though. :)
Which part of the brain is responsible for modifying the configuration of the brain. You know, the one that makes cognitive behavioral therapy work. In other words, where does meta thinking happen and what parts of the brain are responsible for that? That's an INFINITELY more interesting question.
Turns out common sense isn't especially common.
Common Sense
Econ Girl explains it for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Mind blown. You really need 11 minutes of formal academic Economics terminology to say: 0 revenue - unrecoverable fixed costs = you lost money? There's another subject matter domain that can help with this, it's referred to as: common sense.
Ok, let me get this straight. A competitor enters a saturated market where there are very high quality products that people are very satisfied with. This competitor is hoping to introduce a better, competing product or a product at a better price point to shoe horn their way into market and spends a lot of money on R&D based on some irrational product vision? It's not like they couldn't have known there was high risk involved. This sounds like the pointy haired boss in Dilbert. "We are going to make this wonderful doohickey that makes money in a saturated market dominated by good products. My visionary work here is done, now go make it happen." Every time I see this sort of thing from executive management, it makes me want to slap someone especially because the workers usually all get thrown under the bus but they get a golden parachute.
Cervical cancer didn't become deadlier, we've just become slightly better informed.
Nah, just ignore the facts and you'll be more safe! CEO's do it all the time. It really works I tell you! If you claim otherwise, you're just a pessimistic curmudgeon. Gotta stay positive!
Never, ever, tell an angry lesbian shark that she's wrong. Nothing good will ever come from it.
Funny as this is, the post actually had nothing to do with lesbian sharks. Asexual != lesbian.
Life finds a way, life survives - any particular species may not. Life is resilient - but species are not. Indeed it could be argued that life is resilient BECAUSE species are not.
Isn't life in this context an abstract concept in the way you're using it? Life to me is the category of things in the universe that all living things are members of. If that's not what you're referring to, how can you make this claim in this way? I'm not trying to disagree but I'm curious if you could refine your statement to have more precise meaning because I am genuinely interested in your thoughts if you are well versed in the subject matter domain.
They better upgrade or be put out to pasture.
You are being myopic. Look up that definition. Just because I said you need to adequately be equipped to make strategic decisions doesn't automatic validate the premise of your logic. That's a fallacy. Look up the definition of fallacy.
Now let me explain the premise of my original comment. I have experienced several companies make exactly the same argument that you have and in every single case, they experienced direct economic consequences of making decisions based on that premise. They may not have experienced them immediately but once they pulled the trigger, there was no going back. I've worked with all kinds of people trying to bolster things like "we must stay on IE6". In every single case, it was someone being irrationally financially conservative at the present moment and sacrificing future financial gain to the point of actually causing companies to go out of business. The statistics don't favor your argument. Perhaps your situation is an exception but you would have to adequately explain "why". Just making the claim because "I said so" isn't an argument.
Let me also say that you may have had a fundamental attribution error and tagged me as someone who constantly encourages companies to incur experience to constantly upgrade to the latest and greatest thing. Nay. And this is also a problem I encounter a lot where people are engaged in black and white thinking. It has to all be white or black. That's a cognitive distortion in case you weren't aware. The people who want to upgrade for the sake of upgrading are equally as bad as the people that make the types of claims that you do. Both are sacrificing financial gain and the long term well being of their organizations. So if it wasn't clear, when I make decisions, I look at the short term forecast and the long term forecast and I ask myself the question "Change or no change?" and if it makes rational, logical sense to change then we do it. If not, we don't. My experience would dictate that you strongly scrutinize the premise of your argument to make sure it makes sense.
I can tell from your arguments which have apparently become personal that you are inexperienced because people who are experienced don't talk like you. I've worked with many people like you and by comparison you seem to lack experience. It could also be that you are just a poor communicator and are projecting the wrong impression. In reality experience is not necessarily the main consideration. It's about track record. I have a track record of success. That's not arrogance. That's a fact. My pattern of success indicates that my experience and my knowledge that I use to make decisions that have successful outcomes are working and valuable. Making that statement it not arrogance. It's objectively measuring results based on action and presenting them. I'm not going to get into specifics because that's personal information. Your "arrogance" comment is hyperbole and you're just personally attacking someone probably because you feel threatened when someone uses logical and rational thinking which you seem to not be as skilled in.
There are a couple of explanations for that, you might have an inferiority complex or you may be of a personality type that doesn't mesh well with mine. In other words, you may have a preference for a type of thinking and my method of thinking is different. In that case, the difference between you and me is that I have a deep understanding of psychology and can recognize the different types thinking but I don't reject them just because they are different than mine. You are making a mistake by taking this to the realm of personal conflict.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what I say. Whatever organization or company you work for, you know your track record. If you don't, you have a big problem. If you have a good track record with your decision making, great. If not, I would recommend if you want to perform better to do ro
Don't be arrogant. Not every "upgrade" is hindered by some simple home grown Active X web application or some bean counter not wanting to spend money on new Windows licenses. It's a big world out there and there are lots of small businesses that do just fine without being "wiped out" by running older software.
I'm not being arrogant part of my job is to make strategic technology decisions and my comment still stands. The other poster didn't appear to have adequately considered all of the strategic factors that go into technological decision making. It also appeared there was a decent chance they were biased and reacting emotionally. You seem to consider more angles than most, but the fact is there are no straight line decisions to be made. Pick one path, gain more X, get less Y. Pick a different path, get more Y, get less X. Experienced strategists can consider a large number of possibilities and evaluate them objectively and rationally and effectively calculate a weighted score in their mind to pick whatever is considered the best decision based on any number of factors. One way of doing this is called Analytic hierarchy process
Be careful with ad hominem attacks and fundamental attribution error ("Don't be arrogant"). I'm well educated on the subject matter domain. Would you prefer if I feigned ignorance on the topic to make you feel comfortable? That's not the way to have a fruitful conversation is it? Just because I'm challenging people to prove whether they are knowledgeable enough to actually participate in this type of conversation is not arrogance. Think of it this way, if they have substance to add I'm teasing it out because they neglected to share the real information.
I love how I got modded "Redundant". The irony is that was part of the point of my post is that this "news" itself is redundant and nothing new if anyone could be bothered to do real research. And of course, that flew right over someone's head and instead they got butt-hurt over it and resorted to retaliatory modding of my post. Very mature! I've been familiar with this subject matter for 15 years.
Do you realize that some companies have to support old software not because they "rolled their own" junk, but because they are at the mercy of other companies that sell the software that they need to operate? Not every company is a Fortune 500 business with the money to write and support their own applications and some depend on specialized software that may have no alternatives..
That mindset translates to leaving a big door wide open for competition to come along and wipe you out. I can personally sympathize with your position but the free market doesn't particularly care. It's survival of the fittest. Get in the game or get wiped out.
Thank you for being honest. So you see, you don't really know whether you can attribute the problems specifically to Windows 10. It is entirely possible that your staff is under-trained or perhaps group policy administration is slightly different or whatever. It's like when you moved from User Manager for Domains to Active Directory, would you have made the same type of claims about Windows NT vs Windows 2000? I'd be interested in hearing more about root causes of these problems so that we could really get to the bottom of it. It could be that Windows 10 has issues but without that information, we can't conclusively make a determination.
There have been several discussions around a Mars colonization project but the challenges around how long it takes to get there with current propulsion technology and the human lifespan seem to present challenges. Perhaps with sophisticated enough robots, we could send them instead? That would be neat!
This is not a new finding really. We've known about cross-over sensory perception conditions for quite some time. For example: Synesthesia. The artist's representation of what someone with the condition experiences is quite fascinating. Perhaps these types of conditions are under-studied.
The whole reason my company still has Windows 7 is due to having to support an application that ONLY works in IE9.
Any company that developed their web application using home grown quirks mode javascript is going to reap what they sow. They better upgrade or be put out to pasture. It's not hard these days where you have jQuery, bootstrap grids, react and all sorts of things that do everything for you for the most part. Hand-rolling your own javascript frameworks is reinventing the wheel and you're not going to be able to do it better than the popular ones do it now anyway. It's wasted effort.
That is a huge number for most people.
I co-own a small IT services company and one part of the business is basic IT support. In that we have just over 500 customer computers under management and during 2016 the on average 147 windows 10 computers have had an average of 3.4 problem tickets each. The on average 304 windows 7 computers have had an average 0.8 problem tickets each. That is a factor of more than 4!! (The numbers do not contain planned maintenance, new software installation/version upgrade, hardware installation or similar events, just the "something is broken fix it!" classified things.)
These statistics aren't very useful without context. Did you categorize all the problems so we can see that distribution? Do you know all the root causes for all the problems and can specifically attribute each of those root causes to a Windows 7 specific issue and also explain how Windows 10 would have made the problem not occur? I see IT departments do this all time. You folks have a tendency to put forth very superficial information and make claims about it but not really know all the details to actually substantiate your claim.
There's no shortage of money. In fact, a great number of our problems come from the fact that fiat money is easy to supply.
Then why doesn't everyone have as much of it as they want without labor? I think what you're quibbling about is whether the scarcity is artificial or "natural", whatever that means. The fact is from the perspective of most citizens of the world, it is a scarce resource because they don't have it and it is needed to trade for other resources. In my mind, that's no different than saying City Foo has enough bananas to feed the entire world but doesn't allow anyone else to have them. Therefore, from the perspective of anyone who isn't privileged to live in City Foo, bananas are scarce. See what I'm saying? Some of you people are incredibly myopic.
Lets live in reality people.
And that reality is not all laws make sense and everyone always has some type of self-serving agenda. We need to realize we can't correct other people. We can only correct ourselves and hope we inspire others to do the same.
What would a world look like where there is little or no resource scarcity and there is a limited need for labor
You're living in it.
I call bullshit. You don't consider money a resource? It's a resource that is converted into other resources. Conquering resource scarcity means that we all have access to more than we could ever need without having to exchange anything for it. Think Star Trek. We are working are way to that but it is certainly not what we have now.