the classic Stanford Prison experiment and similar studies showed how far context and roles can push people with very little prodding.
You didn't even mention the best part of Philip Zimbardo's work. He wrote a book called The Lucifer Effect and had a TED Talk about his work entitled "The Psychology of Evil": https://www.youtube.com/watch?.... Warning there are some graphically disturbing images in this talk but the content is absolutely fascinating.
I hate to sound like a misanthrope but most humans don't aspire to be moral and ethical beings. Most people out of self interest will "test the waters". If they find they can do something for their own self gain that is of questionable morality and ethics without being detected, most are going to do it.
If you want to do a thought experiment and find out how true this is, imagine this scenario: You have found a super power that enables you to be completely invisible and undetectable. Be honest with yourself, what would you do with that power? Furthermore, what would you do if the economy went south in such a way that you couldn't feed yourself or your family. I rest my case. Consider this very apt movie quote:
The Joker: Don't talk like one of them. You're not! Even if you'd like to be. To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other. See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.
That's a good chunk of the human condition. Good luck solving that.
Yes they can but not without being cognitively impaired compared to full focus on a single task. There are people who can truly multi-task but they are rare, 1% of the population. There are scientific evaluations that can be performed to assess whether you are cognitively impaired when attempting to focus on two tasks at the same time. The majority of us context switch like a pre-emptive multitasking operating system with a single core while the rare segment of the population is essentially "multi-core" with actual parallel processing. It seems to be a trait you're either born with or you're not.
Sudden burst of common sense here. I find it amusing that even Fortune 500 companies can't seem to figure this out. First of all, the level of noise in a corporation in all kinds of forms like corporate email, meetings, etc. is pretty bad. What's worse is that lack of workflow management. All the time, I find myself working on a task only to be interrupted to work on a "this just in and on fire" task only to be interrupted to work on a "this just in and on fire" task ad infinitum.
Let me break this down. Person P starts working on task A only to be interrupted to focus on task B only to be interrupted to focus on task C only to be interrupted to work on task D. Assuming this pattern doesn't go on at the same rate of speed infinitely thus allowing the completion of the task at the top of the stack, eventually what it looks like is this:
Task D completes
[pop]
Resume Task C and recall context
Complete Task C
[pop]
Resume Task B and recall context
Complete Task B
[pop]
Resume Task A and recall context
Complete Task A
[pop]
[empty stack, find new task]
If only corporations new how much productivity was lost at the Resume Task X and recall context step. But you know, keep whipping us for being slackers. The other thing executives don't seem to comprehend is if the deluge of new "on fire" tasks keeps coming in interrupting the one before it, absolutely ZERO work gets done because all the work is half done. This is why LEAN has a concept of waste and work in progress limits. It really works C suite if you could be bothered to read an actual book instead of thinking you already know everything.
Since when did companies become immune to fraud, collusion and misrepresentation?
Did you know manipulating the stock market is illegal per the SEC yet corporations do it all the time via buybacks? How do you suppose that's allowed to happen? Have you looked at the Clinton administration wikileaks documents? For example: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/.... It's all corrupt from top to bottom.
...The US Chamber of Commerce. They have an army of lawyers and keep crafting very complex cases in the Supreme Court to get the laws to suit the interests of large corporations. Think I'm kidding? Do your research? While you're at it, research them holding money in offshore accounts and using buybacks to inflate their stock price instead of reinvesting back in the growth of the corporations. It's become quite corrupt these days. It's going to take a lot to rein in the corruption and I'm not sure how it can be done when they're playing both sides of the aisle.
The problem with using this type of inference algorithm to compute a family tree is that it makes the assumption that the members of the family tree don't live in West Virginia. In that "special" case, the tree is skewed in such a way that it requires fuzzy logic.
He said, "and they let me do it" which implies they gave consent.
It implies only that they didn't (successfully) resist. Not the same thing at all.
This information coming out years after these events occurred coinciding within less than a month of the alleged offender possibly being elected POTUS and without ever having considered filing a police report for the events that occurred in the allegations. What does that imply?
No it does not require legislation, and it is not circumventing the constitution.
Stop right there. Take a step back and inspect. Discussing whether preparing for an extinction event is constitutional? Let me frame this in context right here. If an extinction event occurs, the entire context for the Constitution (human governance) has been lost. The Constitution is as good as cosmic toilet paper at that point. The level that people have taken polarized politics to is remarkable. We probably will go extinct because at some point in the future Congress will need to make a life or death decision that determines whether the human race survives and they will be in gridlock unable to agree while the extinction event occurs. And you know what? We'll deserve it for our failure to cooperate with each other for the benefit of humanity.
Would "Space Weather" be studied by meteorologists?
I wouldn't call it "studying" Bob. Given the statistical probability of a meteorologist being able to accurately predict terrestrial weather patterns, I'm a bit pessimistic about their ability to predict extraterrestrial weather...
Soon we'll be hearing stories about people being DDOS'd and spammed by their own appliances, and I will laugh heartily.
And in other news, talking appliances considered to be part of that new fangled Internet of Things (IoT) declared themselves to be a collective group and now refer to themselves as "Skynet". More news as things develop. Tune in at 11!
Ren: You're not like the others, you like the same things I do. Wax Papers. Boiled football leather. DOG BREATH! We're not hitchhiking anymore. We're riding
Stimpy: Stop it. You're talking crazy.
The teenage brain is actually wired to emphasize reward over risk. Rewards are overvalued, while risks are undervalued. This balance changes as the brain matures.
Everybody's brain is wired to seek out pleasure. It's how we reproduce. This is not limited to teenagers.
The teenage brain has been characterized as a risk-taking machine, looking for quick rewards and thrills instead of acting responsibly
The teenage brain hasn't yet accumulated enough experience to understand the risks of their actions and therefore is naive about the consequences. In the decision making faculties of the brain specifically related to survival, we magnify negative experiences so that we avoid them in the future. The decision tree evolves over time or at least should. Those that don't inevitably have a much higher chance of winning a Darwin award.
One thing Comcast's plan doesn't cover is that based on current internet usage and popular applications (Netflix, Pandora, etc.) their research suggests 1TB is a reasonable cap for 99% of customers. But what happens when more rich applications come out, video resolution goes up and don't forget that new fangled Internet of Things (IoT). Are they going to adjust the caps based on what "reasonable" is on an ongoing basis? I bet not. That in and of itself is not reasonable. Comcast's PR firm has gone to great lengths to present this in agreeable terms on the basis of reasonableness and they did somewhat of a good job but it still looks like there is an opportunity for an unethical cash grab it's just it will be in the future not in the present.
Fortunately, we have a system that deals with this called free market competition. On that note, Google Fiber/Verizon FioS where you at? I'm ready to switch if you want to become a competitive force in this market space. Get your game on.
Oh boy, everyone discussing the semantics of the argument like it's a new thing that hasn't already been to the Supreme Court. All you have to do is look at prior case law and we know exactly how this is going to go down. I guess enough time has passed that you kids don't know what things like Napster were.
Slashdot Mirror
I still wear my Casio calculator watch, what you talking about?
the classic Stanford Prison experiment and similar studies showed how far context and roles can push people with very little prodding.
You didn't even mention the best part of Philip Zimbardo's work. He wrote a book called The Lucifer Effect and had a TED Talk about his work entitled "The Psychology of Evil": https://www.youtube.com/watch?.... Warning there are some graphically disturbing images in this talk but the content is absolutely fascinating.
I hate to sound like a misanthrope but most humans don't aspire to be moral and ethical beings. Most people out of self interest will "test the waters". If they find they can do something for their own self gain that is of questionable morality and ethics without being detected, most are going to do it.
If you want to do a thought experiment and find out how true this is, imagine this scenario: You have found a super power that enables you to be completely invisible and undetectable. Be honest with yourself, what would you do with that power? Furthermore, what would you do if the economy went south in such a way that you couldn't feed yourself or your family. I rest my case. Consider this very apt movie quote:
The Joker: Don't talk like one of them. You're not! Even if you'd like to be. To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other. See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.
That's a good chunk of the human condition. Good luck solving that.
They win.
You consider mass death a win? You may have a screw loose.
Imagine if the ignorant and deplorable people were allowed to take over the government. It would be the end.
Feudal Lords should never underestimate a mass uprising of peasants. In that situation, everyone loses.
well, people _can_ multitask.
Yes they can but not without being cognitively impaired compared to full focus on a single task. There are people who can truly multi-task but they are rare, 1% of the population. There are scientific evaluations that can be performed to assess whether you are cognitively impaired when attempting to focus on two tasks at the same time. The majority of us context switch like a pre-emptive multitasking operating system with a single core while the rare segment of the population is essentially "multi-core" with actual parallel processing. It seems to be a trait you're either born with or you're not.
"People can't multitask" because reasons.
Sudden burst of common sense here. I find it amusing that even Fortune 500 companies can't seem to figure this out. First of all, the level of noise in a corporation in all kinds of forms like corporate email, meetings, etc. is pretty bad. What's worse is that lack of workflow management. All the time, I find myself working on a task only to be interrupted to work on a "this just in and on fire" task only to be interrupted to work on a "this just in and on fire" task ad infinitum.
Let me break this down. Person P starts working on task A only to be interrupted to focus on task B only to be interrupted to focus on task C only to be interrupted to work on task D. Assuming this pattern doesn't go on at the same rate of speed infinitely thus allowing the completion of the task at the top of the stack, eventually what it looks like is this:
Task D completes
[pop]
Resume Task C and recall context
Complete Task C
[pop]
Resume Task B and recall context
Complete Task B
[pop]
Resume Task A and recall context
Complete Task A
[pop]
[empty stack, find new task]
If only corporations new how much productivity was lost at the Resume Task X and recall context step. But you know, keep whipping us for being slackers. The other thing executives don't seem to comprehend is if the deluge of new "on fire" tasks keeps coming in interrupting the one before it, absolutely ZERO work gets done because all the work is half done. This is why LEAN has a concept of waste and work in progress limits. It really works C suite if you could be bothered to read an actual book instead of thinking you already know everything.
So gays are evil? That's your platform?
Your satire/sarcasm detector isn't properly calibrated. Try rational thinking for a change.
If I was gay I might be a little scared of Trump, but I'd be fucking terrified of Mike Pence.
If you're not Evangelical Christian you should be terrified of Mike Pence because that means you have no sense of morality at all and you're evil.
Since when did companies become immune to fraud, collusion and misrepresentation?
Did you know manipulating the stock market is illegal per the SEC yet corporations do it all the time via buybacks? How do you suppose that's allowed to happen? Have you looked at the Clinton administration wikileaks documents? For example: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/.... It's all corrupt from top to bottom.
...The US Chamber of Commerce. They have an army of lawyers and keep crafting very complex cases in the Supreme Court to get the laws to suit the interests of large corporations. Think I'm kidding? Do your research? While you're at it, research them holding money in offshore accounts and using buybacks to inflate their stock price instead of reinvesting back in the growth of the corporations. It's become quite corrupt these days. It's going to take a lot to rein in the corruption and I'm not sure how it can be done when they're playing both sides of the aisle.
The problem with using this type of inference algorithm to compute a family tree is that it makes the assumption that the members of the family tree don't live in West Virginia. In that "special" case, the tree is skewed in such a way that it requires fuzzy logic.
You do realize you're talking about a country that largely ignores or trivializes rape allegations, right?
We live in a country that trivializes anything of real importance. United States of Apathy and Greed. A shame isn't it?
He said, "and they let me do it" which implies they gave consent.
It implies only that they didn't (successfully) resist. Not the same thing at all.
This information coming out years after these events occurred coinciding within less than a month of the alleged offender possibly being elected POTUS and without ever having considered filing a police report for the events that occurred in the allegations. What does that imply?
No it does not require legislation, and it is not circumventing the constitution.
Stop right there. Take a step back and inspect. Discussing whether preparing for an extinction event is constitutional? Let me frame this in context right here. If an extinction event occurs, the entire context for the Constitution (human governance) has been lost. The Constitution is as good as cosmic toilet paper at that point. The level that people have taken polarized politics to is remarkable. We probably will go extinct because at some point in the future Congress will need to make a life or death decision that determines whether the human race survives and they will be in gridlock unable to agree while the extinction event occurs. And you know what? We'll deserve it for our failure to cooperate with each other for the benefit of humanity.
Would "Space Weather" be studied by meteorologists?
I wouldn't call it "studying" Bob. Given the statistical probability of a meteorologist being able to accurately predict terrestrial weather patterns, I'm a bit pessimistic about their ability to predict extraterrestrial weather...
Soon we'll be hearing stories about people being DDOS'd and spammed by their own appliances, and I will laugh heartily.
And in other news, talking appliances considered to be part of that new fangled Internet of Things (IoT) declared themselves to be a collective group and now refer to themselves as "Skynet". More news as things develop. Tune in at 11!
You don't hit a nail with a screwdriver. Microwaves, my friend. They work much better for heating up things including food on occasion.
Ren: You're not like the others, you like the same things I do. Wax Papers. Boiled football leather. DOG BREATH! We're not hitchhiking anymore. We're riding
Stimpy: Stop it. You're talking crazy.
The teenage brain is actually wired to emphasize reward over risk. Rewards are overvalued, while risks are undervalued. This balance changes as the brain matures.
Everybody's brain is wired to seek out pleasure. It's how we reproduce. This is not limited to teenagers.
The teenage brain has been characterized as a risk-taking machine, looking for quick rewards and thrills instead of acting responsibly
The teenage brain hasn't yet accumulated enough experience to understand the risks of their actions and therefore is naive about the consequences. In the decision making faculties of the brain specifically related to survival, we magnify negative experiences so that we avoid them in the future. The decision tree evolves over time or at least should. Those that don't inevitably have a much higher chance of winning a Darwin award.
Based on the video, it looks like the only reason Microsoft is interested in re-vamping Paint is to make a more compelling reason to use Surface.
One thing Comcast's plan doesn't cover is that based on current internet usage and popular applications (Netflix, Pandora, etc.) their research suggests 1TB is a reasonable cap for 99% of customers. But what happens when more rich applications come out, video resolution goes up and don't forget that new fangled Internet of Things (IoT). Are they going to adjust the caps based on what "reasonable" is on an ongoing basis? I bet not. That in and of itself is not reasonable. Comcast's PR firm has gone to great lengths to present this in agreeable terms on the basis of reasonableness and they did somewhat of a good job but it still looks like there is an opportunity for an unethical cash grab it's just it will be in the future not in the present.
Fortunately, we have a system that deals with this called free market competition. On that note, Google Fiber/Verizon FioS where you at? I'm ready to switch if you want to become a competitive force in this market space. Get your game on.
Oh boy, everyone discussing the semantics of the argument like it's a new thing that hasn't already been to the Supreme Court. All you have to do is look at prior case law and we know exactly how this is going to go down. I guess enough time has passed that you kids don't know what things like Napster were.
Didn't you kids learn about this in history class yet? A&M Records vs. Napster
It's like the new old thing!