well, there is one component that is pretty standard and easilly upgradable, the stereo. I just purchased a used car (2008 miata). The stereo came with a 30 pin ipod connector tucked in the glovebox. Ive outfitted it with the required lighting adapter to work with my phone, but i wouldn't mind having a modern stereo that can do bluetooth. The upgrade might be painless, but there's one big issue: THIEVES. The big selling point of the kind of crummy factory stereo is it's good enough and nobody is going to want to steal it.
thanks for taking it into consideration. and i don't want to be misconstrued. i don't think a chimpanzee or orangutang should have rights in our society. They aren't us. They can't be a functioning member of our society, nor would they desire that.
Like you say, We already have laws about cruelty to animals, and AFAIK they take into account the requirements for the animal in question. I'm good with that.
Personally, I think the differences between our minds and the minds of many animals is not as great as we like to fool ourselves into thinking. Our minds come up with great narritives about why we love and hate and fear. They are undoubtedly far more intricate than what a chimpanzee is experiencing, but i'm of the belief that it's not the emotion that separates us from them, just the story we tell ourselves. In a sense, it's an illusion that makes us think we are different.
I'm no PETA member though. I'm ok with eating animals. I'm ok with using animals. The world worked that way long before us. All i',m looking for is doing these things with an understanding of what the true impact is.
Many animals tend to display all kinds of abnormal behaviors that seem to be brought on by the stress of confinement. it shows up as pacing and various weird tick like behaviors. it's not uncommon to see that kind of thing in caged humans as well. Obviously we can't ask them, but the behavior seems similar enough to me that i believe they are feeling something similar to what we feel.
I worked in the pet industry for a long time and saw this kind of thing in all kinds of animals all the way down to reptiles and fish. It is not uncommon for animals to refuse to eat in captivity either. I also believe that the stress of confinement is also reduced by simply ensuring the environment is large and varried enough. Heck, that even obviously applies to people. Nobody likes to be locked in their room. House arrest is considered punishment. But many people spend their whole lives in the same 10 square mile area and are happy. really, we are all kind of imprisoned on a big rock floating in space, but it doesn't feel like it. unless you think about it, then it oddly does start to feel confining.
It's interesting in how stereotypically engineery the woz is. Most people see the fact that they were in a garage as really important to the apple story. The woz doesn't care about that cruft (and likely a lot of the slashdot community agrees). It's touchy feely and to him obviously you are going to be living somewhere. to him, lots of people spent time in garages. He cares about his eureka moments in breadboarding the first prototypes.
you probably would be. i'm thinking of times i walk into the breakroom at work. WHOA! THERES PIZZA THERE! even if it's cold and of questionable age, it's like finding a $20 bill in an old coat. it doesn't matter what kind it is. everyone seems to react this way.
I think it sounds like a pretty good use of technology. It's a pizza. It's not like it's some important life decision.
Most of the time we are just happy with whatever pizza we happen to find. Incongruently the decision on what pizza to order often seems to be one of the most paralyzing decisions anyone ever faces. I think we tend to overthink it pretty often. This seems like it could actually streamline the process. it doesn't seem to require any kind of commitment to the result. it shows you the pizza and if you don't like it, you can probably just abort and go back to engineering your perfect pizza.
i'd be kind of curious to try out a pure bayesian pizza ordering system where it literally just had a pizza for me based on my past orders. Of course that implies that pizza hut has to know me and all my orders, and it wouldn't hurt to correlate that with some other data about what i'm doing. This whole idea of basing it simply off what i appear to be looking at sounds non intrusive and perfectly reasonable. for a pizza.
we allow humans to decide to kill humans. If we could build an autonomous machine similar to Data, which we are forced to concede has sentience equal to our own, could it be allowed to make that judgement call? If not, wouldn't we then be sowing the seeds for the robot uprising right from the start by belittling it's judgement abilities compared to our own?
my gripe about the first story wasn't the small sample size. It's the source of the sample. The scope of the question seemed framed in terms of US society. Who knows where you are sampling on mechanical turk?
ha ha! this was my first thought after reading the summary. I have no playstation. i'm sure as hell not going to be swayed into buying one just to watch movies and tv.
This is a good point. I wanted to make it. i'll just piggyback on your comment. Mechanical turk seems like a terrible place to try to quantify the views of a society. Unless, of course, you are trying to get statistics on the views of the society of mechanical turk.
zeno's paradox isn't quite the same. there's a difference between defining two points on a road and attempting to define all points between them. one is possible, the other is not. Further, first year calculus books will claim that there is no paradox there, just the wrong math.
The test subjects operated a robot arm with their finger. sometimes it would move in sync with them and poke them in the back. then they felt like they were poking themselves in the back. understandable. sometimes it was delayed. Then they felt like someone else was poking them in the back.
How is that a breakdown of your self cohesion processing? Something you aren't really controlling is just poking you in the back! Sure, you gave the input, but i expect your cohesion times out after a couple milliseconds. we couldn't function if we were trying to attribute every sensation we receive for 5 seconds after doing something as part of our actions.
I'm sure we've all had the experience of being poked in the back by a tree branch. Your brain forms a convincing description that someone is there until you turn around and see it's just a branch. that sounds more like what is being demonstrated here.
i didn't see any mention of a control where people were just randomly poked in the back.
In our experience, there's always a next question. I wouldn't call that a paradox. That's like saying driving down the road is a paradox because once you finish a mile, there's another mile.
If we can say for certainty that our universe was created in this quantum fluctuation we answered a question. It raised another question about what is fluctuating, but that question doesn't invalidate the first. We moved ahead.
Yeah, i didn't mean that we know they have consumed people. Just that there is a high probability that the largest of the big snakes are physically capable of swallowing a person. It likely wouldn't go well for the snake either. There are a number of verified stories of snakes of all sizes suffering after swallowing too large of a meal. That's what i find seriously concerning about this effort.
I also find it hard to believe that you could coax a snake into swallowing a guy in a big suit too. I've been bitten plenty of times by large snakes because i smelled like rat or rabbit. while they certainly would have been capable of then proceeding to swallow my hand, they instead realize it is not what they thought it was and release. They aren't that stupid.
yeah, i think it's easy for us to miss the importance of all the data our brains gather in childhood. Neuroplasticity be damned, i don't think it's the kind of database your brain is able to set up later either. I think best case scenario, a person who spent too much VR time in their formative years would experience the outside world much as we experience VR; not quite right. I think worst case scenario could go off the charts. At the very least, i don't think i would trust such a person behind the wheel of a car.
It's like the hipsters came along and said, "i'm not using the meta materials modern society is pushing on me, i'm only getting craft Goos-Hachen effect made the way my grandpa would make it. with dirt!"
According to Anses, the process of assimilating a three-dimensional effect requires the eyes to look at images in two different places at the same time before the brain translates it as one image.
Isn't that how normal vision works anyway?
sure, but modern 3d tech, as good as it is, is still a bit of a kludge. the screen is still a fixed distance away from your eyes. the image doesn't move when you move your eyes. the interpupilary distance used to render the two images may not match your own. Having viewed a 3d world our whole lives we are impressed by the reproduction in an occulus rift. However we are also blissfully unaware how much work went into our brain building up a database of how to interpret what is coming in from our eyes.
for example: When i scan about my desk, my eyes converge on various things. My brain is getting the two images, but unlike the images from a vr headset, the projection matrices are along different normals, the subject may be closer to one eye than another and that eye is at a different focal distance, all of that means something to your brain. It's not just cruft. The lack of a lot of this contributes to the disorientation most people feel when they first strap on an occulus. Your eye is being fed an image that is generated from a crude eye that is not quite doing what your eye is doing.
that said, it's unlikely that a kid who grows up with too much vr is going to die. they just might feel a bit dizzy walking around the real world. is that horrible? or is it like how my teachers didn't like me relying on a computer to do math. maybe i'm not as good at head math, but knowing how to do it with the tool sure has been beneficial to me.
If there was ever a need to let the dogs of peta run wild, it's this. This is disgustingly shameful. It serves no purpose other than to abuse a snake for entertainment.
Nothing can be gained from this. We already know the snakes can eat a person. We can already send far less obstrusive sensors safely through a snake if we really need to see what's going on in there.
c'mon a show in which ted nugent would kill and eat an anaconda before our eyes would be more on the up and up than this crap.
Slashdot Mirror
well, there is one component that is pretty standard and easilly upgradable, the stereo. I just purchased a used car (2008 miata). The stereo came with a 30 pin ipod connector tucked in the glovebox. Ive outfitted it with the required lighting adapter to work with my phone, but i wouldn't mind having a modern stereo that can do bluetooth. The upgrade might be painless, but there's one big issue: THIEVES. The big selling point of the kind of crummy factory stereo is it's good enough and nobody is going to want to steal it.
thanks for taking it into consideration. and i don't want to be misconstrued. i don't think a chimpanzee or orangutang should have rights in our society. They aren't us. They can't be a functioning member of our society, nor would they desire that.
Like you say, We already have laws about cruelty to animals, and AFAIK they take into account the requirements for the animal in question. I'm good with that.
Personally, I think the differences between our minds and the minds of many animals is not as great as we like to fool ourselves into thinking. Our minds come up with great narritives about why we love and hate and fear. They are undoubtedly far more intricate than what a chimpanzee is experiencing, but i'm of the belief that it's not the emotion that separates us from them, just the story we tell ourselves. In a sense, it's an illusion that makes us think we are different.
I'm no PETA member though. I'm ok with eating animals. I'm ok with using animals. The world worked that way long before us. All i',m looking for is doing these things with an understanding of what the true impact is.
Many animals tend to display all kinds of abnormal behaviors that seem to be brought on by the stress of confinement. it shows up as pacing and various weird tick like behaviors. it's not uncommon to see that kind of thing in caged humans as well. Obviously we can't ask them, but the behavior seems similar enough to me that i believe they are feeling something similar to what we feel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
I worked in the pet industry for a long time and saw this kind of thing in all kinds of animals all the way down to reptiles and fish. It is not uncommon for animals to refuse to eat in captivity either. I also believe that the stress of confinement is also reduced by simply ensuring the environment is large and varried enough. Heck, that even obviously applies to people. Nobody likes to be locked in their room. House arrest is considered punishment. But many people spend their whole lives in the same 10 square mile area and are happy. really, we are all kind of imprisoned on a big rock floating in space, but it doesn't feel like it. unless you think about it, then it oddly does start to feel confining.
It's interesting in how stereotypically engineery the woz is. Most people see the fact that they were in a garage as really important to the apple story. The woz doesn't care about that cruft (and likely a lot of the slashdot community agrees). It's touchy feely and to him obviously you are going to be living somewhere. to him, lots of people spent time in garages. He cares about his eureka moments in breadboarding the first prototypes.
you probably would be. i'm thinking of times i walk into the breakroom at work. WHOA! THERES PIZZA THERE! even if it's cold and of questionable age, it's like finding a $20 bill in an old coat. it doesn't matter what kind it is. everyone seems to react this way.
I think it sounds like a pretty good use of technology. It's a pizza. It's not like it's some important life decision.
Most of the time we are just happy with whatever pizza we happen to find. Incongruently the decision on what pizza to order often seems to be one of the most paralyzing decisions anyone ever faces. I think we tend to overthink it pretty often. This seems like it could actually streamline the process. it doesn't seem to require any kind of commitment to the result. it shows you the pizza and if you don't like it, you can probably just abort and go back to engineering your perfect pizza.
i'd be kind of curious to try out a pure bayesian pizza ordering system where it literally just had a pizza for me based on my past orders. Of course that implies that pizza hut has to know me and all my orders, and it wouldn't hurt to correlate that with some other data about what i'm doing. This whole idea of basing it simply off what i appear to be looking at sounds non intrusive and perfectly reasonable. for a pizza.
lol! this might actually be the funniest response ive ever seen posted. i really wish i had mod points.
With the right color commentary I think we could have a entire youtube channel dedicated to putting together jigsaw puzzles.
1)get a hot chick to put together jugsaw puzzles on youtube.
2)profit!
it has the worst weather!
we allow humans to decide to kill humans. If we could build an autonomous machine similar to Data, which we are forced to concede has sentience equal to our own, could it be allowed to make that judgement call? If not, wouldn't we then be sowing the seeds for the robot uprising right from the start by belittling it's judgement abilities compared to our own?
well then. you seem to have adequately addressed my gripe :)
my gripe about the first story wasn't the small sample size. It's the source of the sample. The scope of the question seemed framed in terms of US society. Who knows where you are sampling on mechanical turk?
ha ha! this was my first thought after reading the summary. I have no playstation. i'm sure as hell not going to be swayed into buying one just to watch movies and tv.
This is a good point. I wanted to make it. i'll just piggyback on your comment. Mechanical turk seems like a terrible place to try to quantify the views of a society. Unless, of course, you are trying to get statistics on the views of the society of mechanical turk.
Breasts are most definitely not intrinsically sexual! They have been sexualized in much of our modern cultures but they are not intrinsically so.
I'm pretty sure all dimorphism in the human species is intrinsically sexual. Cultures can choose to draw lines wherever they wish.
zeno's paradox isn't quite the same. there's a difference between defining two points on a road and attempting to define all points between them. one is possible, the other is not. Further, first year calculus books will claim that there is no paradox there, just the wrong math.
The test subjects operated a robot arm with their finger. sometimes it would move in sync with them and poke them in the back. then they felt like they were poking themselves in the back. understandable. sometimes it was delayed. Then they felt like someone else was poking them in the back.
How is that a breakdown of your self cohesion processing? Something you aren't really controlling is just poking you in the back! Sure, you gave the input, but i expect your cohesion times out after a couple milliseconds. we couldn't function if we were trying to attribute every sensation we receive for 5 seconds after doing something as part of our actions.
I'm sure we've all had the experience of being poked in the back by a tree branch. Your brain forms a convincing description that someone is there until you turn around and see it's just a branch. that sounds more like what is being demonstrated here.
i didn't see any mention of a control where people were just randomly poked in the back.
In our experience, there's always a next question. I wouldn't call that a paradox. That's like saying driving down the road is a paradox because once you finish a mile, there's another mile.
If we can say for certainty that our universe was created in this quantum fluctuation we answered a question. It raised another question about what is fluctuating, but that question doesn't invalidate the first. We moved ahead.
Yeah, i didn't mean that we know they have consumed people. Just that there is a high probability that the largest of the big snakes are physically capable of swallowing a person. It likely wouldn't go well for the snake either. There are a number of verified stories of snakes of all sizes suffering after swallowing too large of a meal. That's what i find seriously concerning about this effort.
I also find it hard to believe that you could coax a snake into swallowing a guy in a big suit too. I've been bitten plenty of times by large snakes because i smelled like rat or rabbit. while they certainly would have been capable of then proceeding to swallow my hand, they instead realize it is not what they thought it was and release. They aren't that stupid.
yeah, i think it's easy for us to miss the importance of all the data our brains gather in childhood. Neuroplasticity be damned, i don't think it's the kind of database your brain is able to set up later either. I think best case scenario, a person who spent too much VR time in their formative years would experience the outside world much as we experience VR; not quite right. I think worst case scenario could go off the charts. At the very least, i don't think i would trust such a person behind the wheel of a car.
It's like the hipsters came along and said, "i'm not using the meta materials modern society is pushing on me, i'm only getting craft Goos-Hachen effect made the way my grandpa would make it. with dirt!"
According to Anses, the process of assimilating a three-dimensional effect requires the eyes to look at images in two different places at the same time before the brain translates it as one image.
Isn't that how normal vision works anyway?
sure, but modern 3d tech, as good as it is, is still a bit of a kludge. the screen is still a fixed distance away from your eyes. the image doesn't move when you move your eyes. the interpupilary distance used to render the two images may not match your own. Having viewed a 3d world our whole lives we are impressed by the reproduction in an occulus rift. However we are also blissfully unaware how much work went into our brain building up a database of how to interpret what is coming in from our eyes.
for example: When i scan about my desk, my eyes converge on various things. My brain is getting the two images, but unlike the images from a vr headset, the projection matrices are along different normals, the subject may be closer to one eye than another and that eye is at a different focal distance, all of that means something to your brain. It's not just cruft. The lack of a lot of this contributes to the disorientation most people feel when they first strap on an occulus. Your eye is being fed an image that is generated from a crude eye that is not quite doing what your eye is doing.
that said, it's unlikely that a kid who grows up with too much vr is going to die. they just might feel a bit dizzy walking around the real world. is that horrible? or is it like how my teachers didn't like me relying on a computer to do math. maybe i'm not as good at head math, but knowing how to do it with the tool sure has been beneficial to me.
how is this even possible without graphene, carbon nanotubes or metamaterials? This is just done with normal everyday stuff?
i'm not really condoning the nug' kills a snake. obviously that snake is guaranteed to die where this one might just be uncomfortable,
If there was ever a need to let the dogs of peta run wild, it's this. This is disgustingly shameful. It serves no purpose other than to abuse a snake for entertainment.
Nothing can be gained from this. We already know the snakes can eat a person. We can already send far less obstrusive sensors safely through a snake if we really need to see what's going on in there.
c'mon a show in which ted nugent would kill and eat an anaconda before our eyes would be more on the up and up than this crap.