One reviewer doesn't even know how to use a widget. Another says it doesn't work after ICS, yet another says it worked until jelly bean. My widget is not running with root permissions - yet data gets toggled from widget.
You seem to be from a country where carriers mess with phones. There is no bigger suspect given such contradictory reviews.
Because the democratic concepts of equal justice and equal representation under law have not yet developed to take into account the allegedly different intelligence levels of different identifiable subpopulations.
This is not extraordinary in the sense it would need extraordinary evidence. Because this is just the extreme unpreparedness of society to deal with this fact if it is proven, and to prove it we would need to understand intelligence much better than we do. So this is not a valid reason. Extraordinary consequence of an event are not being discussed here.
. And because the best evidence so far is that intelligence metrics correlate more with socioeconomic status among people of the same race than with race among people with similar socioeconomic status.
Valid reason, but I already addressed it. Best evidence so far doesn't matter much because we have a very poor idea of what intelligence even is. We measure the expression of intelligence, which is more affected by nurture - although nature's effect on intelligence also has evidence.
Such weak evidence in favor of identical intelligences among races is not sufficient for the "extraordinary" claim that intelligence are identical. Because no measurable trait that could have genetic influence has been found identical among races.
Why is it extraordinary? Populations genetically isolated for centuries frequently diverge in traits. Appearance traits are obvious proof. If there are intelligence differences too, why would it be surprising? It is so unsurprising that Darwin had this as one of his first observations.
We can't currently prove it because intelligence is not measurable enough because all types of intelligence have not been identified and understood well enough.
But it would be highly surprising if such a complex thing as intelligence turns out to be identical in all measures of central tendency as well as all measures of variation in populations genetically isolated for long times. Races are known to have different average, median, standard variation and variance of height, weight, skin color, eye color, malaria incidence, sickle cell anemia incidence, heart disease prevalence.
Do, rather than memorize and the memorization will come naturally.
Any evidence to support this? Counter-evidence follows:
As proven by studies in human memory, like memory castle technique, spaced repetition etc.; as well as results of memory olympics - it is clear that techniques of best utilizing one's memory are not easy to "come naturally" when solving problems. E.g. it might so happen that some facts that are easy to memorize are repeated too often in typical problems - causing overlearning (Einstellung). Some other facts, difficult to memorize, not repeating often enough , making them easy to forget. Both are bad for future problem solving in this subject.
Crafting problems to solve too carefully to avoid these issues makes them unnatural, and often takes away the fun of solving the problem itself. It also often makes the answer or a solution approach obvious - e.g. if the problem is stated like this, we should take this solution approach. Students thus become ill-equipped to handle real life which doesn't care about Einstellung or facilitation of memorization by the problem solver.
But this doesn't explain why there wasn't a test case to catch this particular obvious bug - especially where the system is training itself without a degree in law or a sense of ethics. E.g. kicking off passengers and luggage by opening seat belts and opening doors is the next step to increase performance and fuel efficiency.
So the lack of test case happened with at least the QA engineer / QA PHB's knowledge.
You seem to be confirming the original claim that matching Apple quality in all respects requires Apple-like prices
But that is not a useful claim. For most Dell computers, if you try to find an Apple computer with at least as good specifications as the Dell one - the Apple one comes out to be twice as expensive.
With this metric, you could claim that Apple requires twice the money to build Dell-like PCs. This metric is as useless as yours - because Dell doesn't build Apple computers and Apple doesn't build Dell computers.
Actually, stability is required for evolution to happen. Life, however, is not required. But if a system isn't stable enough, it can't evolve
Have you read my post to which you are replying? Most of your reply's content had already been addressed in my post, or it is just restating my post's content in different words.
And there was an implicit belief that evolving should result in smarter, healthier,stronger human beings
I guess so too. But whenever there is an incorrect implicit belief, it is easy to make contradictory statements. I cannot "point out" the incorrect implicit belief, because it is implicit. But I can point out the contradictory statements.
there's really no point in talking about some pre-Darwinian meaning of the word in this context, that just creates confusion; if you want to refer to some other notion pick another word
Not pre-Darwinian, but extra-Darwinian Evolution. It is a highly modern meaning of the word. While it also happens to be pre-Darwinian but I have no language atavism here - even in today's language evolution continues to mean what it used to mean. Only in scientific and specially in species context it is sometimes taken to mean only the Darwinian sense of the word - hence the clarification. But my usage of the word was intermediate between the two meanings - showing transition from one to another. So using another word would be more incorrect.
To the degree that information encoded in the individuals alters the production of subsequent generations and affects the rate and fidelity of production of individuals with that information, that...
Yes, so your sentence that I quoted earlier is false :
"When you first get a self-replicating molecular structure that is sufficiently stable that some modifications don't destroy either its stability or its ability to replicate, that's where evolution begins. Until that point, you cannot have any evolution"
Even if we ignore the misuse of the term self-replication, stability is not required along with replication. Stability can be acquired over time and replication can "evolve" (extra-Darwinian) within a set of unstable individuals and a factory. Hence there is no non-arbitrary cutoff.
At some arbitrary cutoff point, this extra-Darwinian evolution will be called Darwinian evolution due to Darwin's main focus on "living" things which as you point out is loosely defined.
It's actually worse today - the insidiously stupid are not only rewarded (ie: given their own reality show) but encouraged to pass on a host of clearly useless qualities and/or genetics..
When you first get a self-replicating molecular structure that is sufficiently stable that some modifications don't destroy either its stability or its ability to replicate, that's where evolution begins. Until that point, you cannot have any evolution
Not exactly. Because self replication is not a requirement for evolution. Virus evolves without self-replication.
In general if a set of structures can influence the factory that makes the individuals of the set, the set can evolve. Only the set needs to be stable along with the factory, not its individuals.
Such structures can evolve to be self-replicating without themselves satisfying many requirements of life. The whole system including the factory and the set of structures cannot be called "life" because it does not replicate at all. Lack of stability in individuals is compensated by collective stability with factory. I call this process "evolution" because the degree of influence can become more and more direct and strong which satisfies the original definition of "evolution", though not necessarily the Darwinian one.
Hence the cutoff is arbitrary and can arise as part of a long drawn out process.
While that is correct, I see it leads to a different form of discrimination. The "beneficiaries" are spouses of higher income** people, sometimes even young adult sons/daughters of higher income people who haven't moved out yet.
How? They don't really "need" minimum wage, just pocket money. They can live in expensive areas, and drive out people who run the whole family on the minimum wage.
** Higher income people need not be richie rich - a significant difference in incomes can bring about this effect.
Often I come out of suspend while riding public transit, and buses in my city do not offer Wi-Fi.
You haven't defined "correctly" in your statement "which web browser will correctly reopen pages". So everyone is interpreting it differently. In general, if a computer does something, it is by definition "correct" unless user specifies exact correct behaviour.
From your other replies in this thread, it seems you want the page to show the content as if internet is active, even though internet is not active. In this, Linux beats MS Windows handily (and Firefox beats Internet Explorer by a small margin)
1. Firefox desktop has an option to save a page to "pocket". Which does what my guess of your badly stated requirement is - save the page content to be viewable offline.
2. Firefox Android has something similar.
3. It is a million times easier to "Print to PDF" in Linux as compared to Windows. Out of the box in main distros for last 15 years. This beats screenshots by a wide margin because screenshots work horribly for scrollable web pages
but it's simply not significantly better if the rental price is reasonable
Why would rental price be "reasonable"? There is a manufacturer, and there is a financier. Financier's whole profit depends on the rental price not being "reasonable".
Financier might also be the retailer - in which its profits might come from sales margin rather than financing. But now margins need to be higher than if it were only a retailer because financing has costs.
That's ok. You have a certain disability - you can't switch away from MS windows. Some of it is due to making choices in the past without a data migration plan (or a bad plan) to switch to an alternative some day - e.g. getting an iPhone and/or buying significant amount of music with iTunes. Some of it might be due to specific life situations.
But many others have other disabilities - blindness, deafness, learning disabilities. They have to live with it, you have to live with "Microsoft Downloading Windows 10 without asking".
Three reasons I [winehq.org] can't [winehq.org] switch [winehq.org], I got plenty more
There are handicapped/disabled people in the world. Some can't see, some can't speak, some can't run, some can't learn easily, some can't switch away from MS windows. That is fine.
But I haven't seen most such people threaten to see, speak, run, learn easily or switch away from MS windows. So if a reasonable person is threatening, chances are that he is not disabled from carrying out his threats.
2. "exactly WHEN stock market became completely a bad idea for a "diversified portfolio of long-term investments" ?"
But you answered a made up question:
"exactly when stock market became completely a bad idea as the STRATEGY for "diversified portfolio of long-term investments".
Which is great. But can you now try answering the original question, now that you have talked to imaginary straw men enough for a life time? I repeat the original question:
2. "exactly WHEN stock market became completely a bad idea for a "diversified portfolio of long-term investments" ?"
None of the questions 0, 1 or 2 have even begun to be answered. You quote the question and then continue repeating the non - answer for the n-th time. Why don't you try answering the questions for a change?
E.g. the answer to "WHEN" doesn't have to be an explanation of raymorris' statement. It is supposed to be a time , as you might have studied in 3rd standard, primary school if you went to one.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you know, that the 2 statements :
1. "The EPA used stupid testing procedures" and
2. "VW are criminals"
could both be correct ? Or should I start telling you to "stop making excuses for corrupt / inept regulatory agencies" ?
One reviewer doesn't even know how to use a widget. Another says it doesn't work after ICS, yet another says it worked until jelly bean. My widget is not running with root permissions - yet data gets toggled from widget.
You seem to be from a country where carriers mess with phones. There is no bigger suspect given such contradictory reviews.
Widgets on my jelly bean phone turn off mobile data easily. A kitkat tablet doesn't find it difficult either. Both not rooted.
To say nothing of my rooted lollipop phone, of course.
Changing preference of 2g,3g,4g has indeed been difficult for widgets since ICS, I think.
Because the democratic concepts of equal justice and equal representation under law have not yet developed to take into account the allegedly different intelligence levels of different identifiable subpopulations.
This is not extraordinary in the sense it would need extraordinary evidence. Because this is just the extreme unpreparedness of society to deal with this fact if it is proven, and to prove it we would need to understand intelligence much better than we do. So this is not a valid reason. Extraordinary consequence of an event are not being discussed here.
. And because the best evidence so far is that intelligence metrics correlate more with socioeconomic status among people of the same race than with race among people with similar socioeconomic status.
Valid reason, but I already addressed it. Best evidence so far doesn't matter much because we have a very poor idea of what intelligence even is. We measure the expression of intelligence, which is more affected by nurture - although nature's effect on intelligence also has evidence.
Such weak evidence in favor of identical intelligences among races is not sufficient for the "extraordinary" claim that intelligence are identical. Because no measurable trait that could have genetic influence has been found identical among races.
Why is it extraordinary? Populations genetically isolated for centuries frequently diverge in traits. Appearance traits are obvious proof. If there are intelligence differences too, why would it be surprising? It is so unsurprising that Darwin had this as one of his first observations.
We can't currently prove it because intelligence is not measurable enough because all types of intelligence have not been identified and understood well enough.
But it would be highly surprising if such a complex thing as intelligence turns out to be identical in all measures of central tendency as well as all measures of variation in populations genetically isolated for long times. Races are known to have different average, median, standard variation and variance of height, weight, skin color, eye color, malaria incidence, sickle cell anemia incidence, heart disease prevalence.
Do, rather than memorize and the memorization will come naturally.
Any evidence to support this? Counter-evidence follows:
As proven by studies in human memory, like memory castle technique, spaced repetition etc.; as well as results of memory olympics - it is clear that techniques of best utilizing one's memory are not easy to "come naturally" when solving problems. E.g. it might so happen that some facts that are easy to memorize are repeated too often in typical problems - causing overlearning (Einstellung). Some other facts, difficult to memorize, not repeating often enough , making them easy to forget. Both are bad for future problem solving in this subject.
Crafting problems to solve too carefully to avoid these issues makes them unnatural, and often takes away the fun of solving the problem itself. It also often makes the answer or a solution approach obvious - e.g. if the problem is stated like this, we should take this solution approach. Students thus become ill-equipped to handle real life which doesn't care about Einstellung or facilitation of memorization by the problem solver.
But this doesn't explain why there wasn't a test case to catch this particular obvious bug - especially where the system is training itself without a degree in law or a sense of ethics. E.g. kicking off passengers and luggage by opening seat belts and opening doors is the next step to increase performance and fuel efficiency.
So the lack of test case happened with at least the QA engineer / QA PHB's knowledge.
You seem to be confirming the original claim that matching Apple quality in all respects requires Apple-like prices
But that is not a useful claim. For most Dell computers, if you try to find an Apple computer with at least as good specifications as the Dell one - the Apple one comes out to be twice as expensive.
With this metric, you could claim that Apple requires twice the money to build Dell-like PCs. This metric is as useless as yours - because Dell doesn't build Apple computers and Apple doesn't build Dell computers.
You forgot the "because ..." part of your statement.
This is explicitly addressed in my original post in this thread - http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
If you disagree with it why don't you address it rather than starting from a,b,c again?
Actually, stability is required for evolution to happen. Life, however, is not required. But if a system isn't stable enough, it can't evolve
Have you read my post to which you are replying? Most of your reply's content had already been addressed in my post, or it is just restating my post's content in different words.
And there was an implicit belief that evolving should result in smarter, healthier,stronger human beings
I guess so too. But whenever there is an incorrect implicit belief, it is easy to make contradictory statements. I cannot "point out" the incorrect implicit belief, because it is implicit. But I can point out the contradictory statements.
there's really no point in talking about some pre-Darwinian meaning of the word in this context, that just creates confusion; if you want to refer to some other notion pick another word
Not pre-Darwinian, but extra-Darwinian Evolution. It is a highly modern meaning of the word. While it also happens to be pre-Darwinian but I have no language atavism here - even in today's language evolution continues to mean what it used to mean. Only in scientific and specially in species context it is sometimes taken to mean only the Darwinian sense of the word - hence the clarification. But my usage of the word was intermediate between the two meanings - showing transition from one to another. So using another word would be more incorrect.
To the degree that information encoded in the individuals alters the production of subsequent generations and affects the rate and fidelity of production of individuals with that information, that ...
Yes, so your sentence that I quoted earlier is false :
"When you first get a self-replicating molecular structure that is sufficiently stable that some modifications don't destroy either its stability or its ability to replicate, that's where evolution begins. Until that point, you cannot have any evolution"
Even if we ignore the misuse of the term self-replication, stability is not required along with replication. Stability can be acquired over time and replication can "evolve" (extra-Darwinian) within a set of unstable individuals and a factory. Hence there is no non-arbitrary cutoff.
At some arbitrary cutoff point, this extra-Darwinian evolution will be called Darwinian evolution due to Darwin's main focus on "living" things which as you point out is loosely defined.
Contradictory statements:
I would submit that humans are no longer evolving
It's actually worse today - the insidiously stupid are not only rewarded (ie: given their own reality show) but encouraged to pass on a host of clearly useless qualities and/or genetics..
When you first get a self-replicating molecular structure that is sufficiently stable that some modifications don't destroy either its stability or its ability to replicate, that's where evolution begins. Until that point, you cannot have any evolution
Not exactly. Because self replication is not a requirement for evolution. Virus evolves without self-replication.
In general if a set of structures can influence the factory that makes the individuals of the set, the set can evolve. Only the set needs to be stable along with the factory, not its individuals.
Such structures can evolve to be self-replicating without themselves satisfying many requirements of life. The whole system including the factory and the set of structures cannot be called "life" because it does not replicate at all. Lack of stability in individuals is compensated by collective stability with factory. I call this process "evolution" because the degree of influence can become more and more direct and strong which satisfies the original definition of "evolution", though not necessarily the Darwinian one.
Hence the cutoff is arbitrary and can arise as part of a long drawn out process.
While that is correct, I see it leads to a different form of discrimination. The "beneficiaries" are spouses of higher income** people, sometimes even young adult sons/daughters of higher income people who haven't moved out yet.
How? They don't really "need" minimum wage, just pocket money. They can live in expensive areas, and drive out people who run the whole family on the minimum wage.
** Higher income people need not be richie rich - a significant difference in incomes can bring about this effect.
Often I come out of suspend while riding public transit, and buses in my city do not offer Wi-Fi.
You haven't defined "correctly" in your statement "which web browser will correctly reopen pages". So everyone is interpreting it differently. In general, if a computer does something, it is by definition "correct" unless user specifies exact correct behaviour.
From your other replies in this thread, it seems you want the page to show the content as if internet is active, even though internet is not active. In this, Linux beats MS Windows handily (and Firefox beats Internet Explorer by a small margin)
1. Firefox desktop has an option to save a page to "pocket". Which does what my guess of your badly stated requirement is - save the page content to be viewable offline.
2. Firefox Android has something similar.
3. It is a million times easier to "Print to PDF" in Linux as compared to Windows. Out of the box in main distros for last 15 years. This beats screenshots by a wide margin because screenshots work horribly for scrollable web pages
but it's simply not significantly better if the rental price is reasonable
Why would rental price be "reasonable"? There is a manufacturer, and there is a financier. Financier's whole profit depends on the rental price not being "reasonable".
Financier might also be the retailer - in which its profits might come from sales margin rather than financing. But now margins need to be higher than if it were only a retailer because financing has costs.
That's ok. You have a certain disability - you can't switch away from MS windows. Some of it is due to making choices in the past without a data migration plan (or a bad plan) to switch to an alternative some day - e.g. getting an iPhone and/or buying significant amount of music with iTunes. Some of it might be due to specific life situations.
But many others have other disabilities - blindness, deafness, learning disabilities. They have to live with it, you have to live with "Microsoft Downloading Windows 10 without asking".
Three reasons I [winehq.org] can't [winehq.org] switch [winehq.org], I got plenty more
There are handicapped/disabled people in the world. Some can't see, some can't speak, some can't run, some can't learn easily, some can't switch away from MS windows. That is fine.
But I haven't seen most such people threaten to see, speak, run, learn easily or switch away from MS windows. So if a reasonable person is threatening, chances are that he is not disabled from carrying out his threats.
Firefox. Just set it to load tab only on click after restore.
Though if you are not suspending/hibernating, just connect to network *before* starting the browser?
NetworkManager has no clue about "most things", especially none about suspend/resume.
Awesome. So you didn't answer the question :
2. "exactly WHEN stock market became completely a bad idea for a "diversified portfolio of long-term investments" ?"
But you answered a made up question :
"exactly when stock market became completely a bad idea as the STRATEGY for "diversified portfolio of long-term investments".
Which is great. But can you now try answering the original question, now that you have talked to imaginary straw men enough for a life time? I repeat the original question:
2. "exactly WHEN stock market became completely a bad idea for a "diversified portfolio of long-term investments" ?"
is that it's never, NEVER, been an investment strategy
Great. Now can you show me a post in this thread by anybody other than yourself which mentioned anything about it EVER being a strategy?
None of the questions 0, 1 or 2 have even begun to be answered. You quote the question and then continue repeating the non - answer for the n-th time. Why don't you try answering the questions for a change?
E.g. the answer to "WHEN" doesn't have to be an explanation of raymorris' statement. It is supposed to be a time , as you might have studied in 3rd standard, primary school if you went to one.