No. Math is hard because it's like running long distances.
Math isn't just like running long distances, no. Some of it (like algebra) is just learning rules for manipulating symbols, and I guess that bit is sort of like running. It's all more or less the same difficulty.
And then you get into things like calculus where there are irreducible, abstract new concepts to manage. Suddenly you're not running, you're rock climbing.
And then you get to the maths that's actually hard. Really hard. Understanding this stuff is like being able to fly. And if you weren't born with the natural ability, you will never ever understand it.
If something works well it's God's miracle, if it fails then it was your shortcoming (or 'to teach you a lesson' or 'God moving in mysterious ways'.) You can't win this one.
The loud noises thing is so true. On my way to work way back in the day there was a corner that I could take either in 2nd or in 3rd. (This is relevant, I promise). If I took the corner in second, I'd be doing maybe 40-45km/h and making a lot of noise. People would stare disapprovingly and anyone walking across the road anywhere in the area would start running.
If I took the corner in third, I'd make it round at about 50km/h with maybe a tiny bit of tyre noise but no loud revving. Even though I was going faster and would have potentially caused more damage to any pedestrians I hit, zero fucks were given because I wasn't making as loud a noise.
This is what I don't understand. Why do we need separate laws about 3D printed guns? Surely if you're not a licensed gunsmith you can't legally make a gun, whatever the particular tools you use to do it?
For example, requiring police to have a warrant before searching absolutely benefits the guilty more than the innocent but you're not arguing to do away with search warrants.
I agree with what you're saying in general, but I think this bit needs to be clearer. Any individual guilty person is benefited more by these rights than any individual innocent (because guilty and innocent alike would suffer the same from being searched/questioned/etc, but the guilty party would then suffer additionally because they would then be convicted).
The thing that most detractors here seem to be missing is that there are far more innocent people than guilty people. The cost to society of any injustice perpetrated on all innocent people must be weighed against the cost of protecting those innocents from a few perpetrators. It is better to let 100 guilty men go free than to wrongfully convict one innocent man, and all that.
What the poster is asking is *why* he has the right to remain silent and why the right to remain silent benefits society.
As far as I can see, this constitutional right is, pure and simple, a defense against the general propensity of power to use force to extract confessions. Excluding any non-voluntary self-incrimination is the simplest, most foolproof way to exclude torture as an option for obtaining confessions.
The one they were using looked pretty funky, I wonder what the difference in performance is between that one and the cheapie toy ones you can get commercially? The Emotiv Epoc is $300 and apparently (with some hackery) can get you the EEG outputs that you usually have to buy the $700 one for.
I can't help wondering where exactly this is on the scale between actually picking up specific thoughts (or at least muscle intentions) and just using some global clock signal (like that one that detected the change in theta waves or whatnot when you opened/closed your eyes).
The exclusive job of a copyright license (and associated legal enforcement) is to restrict distribution so as to create artificial scarcity and permit commercial distribution by the copyright owners.
Left to themselves, distribution is absolutely something that end users do: Witness every p2p sharing program ever.
Really the trick is just getting a detailed feature-set and being good at estimating how much time things will take you. After you do that then you simply double the amount of time (because things don't always go smoothly).
My mum told me this rule for estimating back when I were a lad. Make your best guess then double it. Still works to this day.
Thanks. When people reply to me, even indirectly, the best ones are with science, because then that gives me something to look up which will actually mean things. Keep up the good work and ty again.
Perfect.:)
The bit I don't get is how "a genetic mutation that causes mammalian neural tissue to expand and fold" disproves "'dumber species will have different genes'? Since, well, it's a gene that's different. Also, conflating folding of the neural tissues with intelligence (rather than simply viewing it as a necessary precursor) sounds like the modern version of "men are more intelligent than women because their brains weigh more."
Actually the Luddites were protesting the introduction of mechanized weaving looms because they were putting weavers out of work. They were more about banning useful tools because they helped people be too effective and so destroyed whole occupations./comicbookguy
But I digress. The difference between the CCTV situation and your small town situation is that for you, that Monday a few of the guys had heard a few details. Within a couple of weeks it was probably forgotten. In a surveillance society the high-def video footage of that bath would be available to anyone with appropriate security clearance, forever.
Win7 doesn't need a "redeeming feature". Its strongest point is that (as WuphonsReach says, above) it just sits in the background and does its thing. It's good at all of the things and OS has to do, without being in your face.
Reading through your post, I noticed that it parallels the 'even-odd' rule for Windows, while pointing to the reason. Starting from Win95 (which was a complete-ish do over and the first Windows that was actually an OS), the "even" releases are the ones that work on user-facing polish. This includes stability, bug fixes, responsiveness, efficiency. This does not include back-end architecture rewrites, server capability etc. These are the ones with a great reputation.
Notice the "odd" ones are 2K, Vista, Windows 8. These are the ones where major, major stuff happened behind the scenes. The result of this is that fewer resources were devoted to making the user experience really awesome. And that's why they "suck" even though they have significant technical advantages.
Slashdot Mirror
No. Math is hard because it's like running long distances.
Math isn't just like running long distances, no. Some of it (like algebra) is just learning rules for manipulating symbols, and I guess that bit is sort of like running. It's all more or less the same difficulty.
And then you get into things like calculus where there are irreducible, abstract new concepts to manage. Suddenly you're not running, you're rock climbing.
And then you get to the maths that's actually hard. Really hard. Understanding this stuff is like being able to fly. And if you weren't born with the natural ability, you will never ever understand it.
If something works well it's God's miracle, if it fails then it was your shortcoming (or 'to teach you a lesson' or 'God moving in mysterious ways'.) You can't win this one.
Secret... fingerer?
Your money or your life.
The loud noises thing is so true. On my way to work way back in the day there was a corner that I could take either in 2nd or in 3rd. (This is relevant, I promise). If I took the corner in second, I'd be doing maybe 40-45km/h and making a lot of noise. People would stare disapprovingly and anyone walking across the road anywhere in the area would start running.
If I took the corner in third, I'd make it round at about 50km/h with maybe a tiny bit of tyre noise but no loud revving. Even though I was going faster and would have potentially caused more damage to any pedestrians I hit, zero fucks were given because I wasn't making as loud a noise.
This is what I don't understand. Why do we need separate laws about 3D printed guns? Surely if you're not a licensed gunsmith you can't legally make a gun, whatever the particular tools you use to do it?
Likewise I'd like to know the correlation between these cameras and other such crimes like "resisting arrest" and "disorderly behaviour".
For example, requiring police to have a warrant before searching absolutely benefits the guilty more than the innocent but you're not arguing to do away with search warrants.
I agree with what you're saying in general, but I think this bit needs to be clearer. Any individual guilty person is benefited more by these rights than any individual innocent (because guilty and innocent alike would suffer the same from being searched/questioned/etc, but the guilty party would then suffer additionally because they would then be convicted).
The thing that most detractors here seem to be missing is that there are far more innocent people than guilty people. The cost to society of any injustice perpetrated on all innocent people must be weighed against the cost of protecting those innocents from a few perpetrators. It is better to let 100 guilty men go free than to wrongfully convict one innocent man, and all that.
What the poster is asking is *why* he has the right to remain silent and why the right to remain silent benefits society. As far as I can see, this constitutional right is, pure and simple, a defense against the general propensity of power to use force to extract confessions. Excluding any non-voluntary self-incrimination is the simplest, most foolproof way to exclude torture as an option for obtaining confessions.
The one they were using looked pretty funky, I wonder what the difference in performance is between that one and the cheapie toy ones you can get commercially? The Emotiv Epoc is $300 and apparently (with some hackery) can get you the EEG outputs that you usually have to buy the $700 one for.
I can't help wondering where exactly this is on the scale between actually picking up specific thoughts (or at least muscle intentions) and just using some global clock signal (like that one that detected the change in theta waves or whatnot when you opened/closed your eyes).
*ahem*
The exclusive job of a copyright license (and associated legal enforcement) is to restrict distribution so as to create artificial scarcity and permit commercial distribution by the copyright owners.
Left to themselves, distribution is absolutely something that end users do: Witness every p2p sharing program ever.
Really the trick is just getting a detailed feature-set and being good at estimating how much time things will take you. After you do that then you simply double the amount of time (because things don't always go smoothly).
My mum told me this rule for estimating back when I were a lad. Make your best guess then double it. Still works to this day.
Yeah, I wondered that. They don't even say if the curvy-brain-mice even lived. :/
Excellent question. I doubt you'll get a good answer because the implication that you are questioning is probably wrong.
Anyone who's worked with chaotic system simulations would be amazed if your answer were any different.
Surely humans are born with a defect in that gene sometimes. Are they dumb?
Probably. Humans are born dumb for a whole bunch of reasons that will someday be easily fixed by science. :(
Thanks. When people reply to me, even indirectly, the best ones are with science, because then that gives me something to look up which will actually mean things. Keep up the good work and ty again.
Perhaps they would have benefited more from a gullible idiot detector.
I can sell you one of those...
Perfect. :)
The bit I don't get is how "a genetic mutation that causes mammalian neural tissue to expand and fold" disproves "'dumber species will have different genes'? Since, well, it's a gene that's different. Also, conflating folding of the neural tissues with intelligence (rather than simply viewing it as a necessary precursor) sounds like the modern version of "men are more intelligent than women because their brains weigh more."
Actually the Luddites were protesting the introduction of mechanized weaving looms because they were putting weavers out of work. They were more about banning useful tools because they helped people be too effective and so destroyed whole occupations. /comicbookguy
But I digress. The difference between the CCTV situation and your small town situation is that for you, that Monday a few of the guys had heard a few details. Within a couple of weeks it was probably forgotten. In a surveillance society the high-def video footage of that bath would be available to anyone with appropriate security clearance, forever.
The real question is, if Windows is dying, what will I run Firefox on?
Win7 doesn't need a "redeeming feature". Its strongest point is that (as WuphonsReach says, above) it just sits in the background and does its thing. It's good at all of the things and OS has to do, without being in your face.
Great summary!
Reading through your post, I noticed that it parallels the 'even-odd' rule for Windows, while pointing to the reason. Starting from Win95 (which was a complete-ish do over and the first Windows that was actually an OS), the "even" releases are the ones that work on user-facing polish. This includes stability, bug fixes, responsiveness, efficiency. This does not include back-end architecture rewrites, server capability etc. These are the ones with a great reputation.
Notice the "odd" ones are 2K, Vista, Windows 8. These are the ones where major, major stuff happened behind the scenes. The result of this is that fewer resources were devoted to making the user experience really awesome. And that's why they "suck" even though they have significant technical advantages.
" And yes, potatoes really do cure warts if your child believes they do." no, thye don't. Yes the warts will go away, but they will ANYWAYS.
It's like cold sore cream. "Symptoms should fade within 7 days". Really? Because they take about that long to heal up regardless of what you do.
February: "Touchscreen notebooks coming whether we want them or not?"
March: "The killer flaw of this notebook is that it has no touchscreen."