No, but the general public (or the media maybe) put the blame on the government for not "heeding" the warning they had.
Government to public: "Meh."
Re:Disturbing Experiment: Who is "I"?
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The Corpus Callosum is simply the connecting point between the hemispheres, it transfers signals from one hemisphere to the other.
The brain is fully functional even when sliced in two, however it does lead to some really fascinating side effects brought about by the differing functions of the two sides.
In effect, we all have two brains, they do different things but by communication we end up with a single whole brain, once you cut the CC you're back to two brains, with different capabilities. Most of the time you won't notice the difference because the brains compensate adequately, but in certain situations you can expose some truely bizarre features.
When a picture was flashed to the right side of the split-brain patient, he could easily tell what was in the picture (keys, a pipe, a banana, whatever) just like a normal, unoperated person. This is because speech is located in the left brain. When pictures were flashed to the left side of the patient, going to the right brain, he kept saying, "I can't see a picture." When the experimenters then asked the patient (who just said he couldn't see the picture) to reach behind a screen and reach into a box with several items such as a key, pipe, glasses, he would always, that is always, pick out the item which had been flashed to his right brain.
So what was going on? It turns out that the right brain did see the picture and understood what was in the picture. But, the right brain does not have a speech center, and so it couldn't tell the experimenters what was in the picture. When the patient said he didn't see it, it was his left brain which was talking! And his left brain did not see the picture because it was shown exclusively the right brain. Although the right brain couldn't speak, it could answer the question with its hand, much like mute people do.
In later experiments, these patients were shown photographs of famous people. Again when they were shown to the left brains, the patient's could identify the person in the picture and verbally report that to the experimenters. This is just like what an ordinary person would do. But, when the picture was shown to the right brain, the mute brain, the person could not verbally report what he saw. The experimenters decided to have the patient use a thumbs up or down signal with their left hand when the pictures were shown exclusively to their mute right brains. The first picture got a thumbs up, the second a thumbs down, and the third a thumbs horizontal. The first was a picture of Johnny Carson, the second, Hitler, and the third Nixon.
What this means is that the experimenters were in effect able to have two separate conversations, one with each hemisphere, left and right. Note that the mute right hemisphere has an intact mind separate from the verbal left sided mind. The right sided mind can't speak, but it does understand English, knows how to follow the experimenters' instructions, and even holds political opinions.
(http://www.schiffermd.com/dualbrain.html)
Here's another interesting link with details about one case which through having an unusual development of language in both sides of the brain the experimenters were able to discover that the two brains (after separation) were vastly different in thier ideas, rigt down to what job the person would like to lead (race car driver vs draghtsman!).
Re:Disturbing Experiment: Who is "I"?
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 1
As the other poster said, no it's not a lobotamy. The procedure is called a Corpus Callosotomy (due to the fact it severes the connections in the Corpus Callosum), and it is still performed in very serious epileptic cases.
It's effective in so far as it will decrease the severity of seizures due to limiting them to the originating side of the brain.
Re:Just because we can?
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I think I've been successfully trolled, but...
How are we to learn, if we don't experiment? These findings could directly and indirectly fundamentally improve our understanding of how the brain operates, and indeed make it so that we can study the workings of brains up close & personal without being invasive into a living creature - human, rat or otherwise.
Isn't that a good thing?
You kind of remind me of a quote from Steven Hawking regarding something the pope said..
"He [the pope] told us that it was all right to study the evolution of the universe after the big bang, but we should not inquire into the big bang itself because that was the moment of Creation and therefore the work of God."
Re:Saw this a few days ago...
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
My guess is, you use the electrodes in the petri dish to stimulate the neurons into strengthening the connections when the plane is doing the right thing (straight and level presumadly) and weaken (or just not strengthen) when the plane is doing the wrong thing (crashing).
I believe that by altering the characteristics of the charge applied over the electrodes this effect could be realised.
Eventually the connections will be strengthened in such as way as the plane is flown straight and level.
Nothing to do with pleasure or pain, just artificially causing the correct connections to strengthen.
Of course, IANABS (Brain Surgeon). So I could be completly wrong, it's just how I imagine they could achieve the desired results.
Airliners actually have quite exceptional glide ratios for powered craft, a 747 is in the region of 15:1 (15 units horizontal for 1 unit vertical), better than many light aircraft.
Funny, those commands work just fine on my RedHat, Fedora, Aurora, and Yellow Dog boxen. Then again, I'm using apt4rpm.
That's all very well, but on all the boxes I've seen with apt-get for rpm the repositories are somewhat devoid of packages, which kinda defeats the purpose of a package management system.
Does anyone remember all the programming books that used to be aimed at kids?
Yep, I had a few of those, I can't remember the titles, I want to say "Byte Brothers" or something like that. Kids "whodunnit" books where they used BASIC computer programs (source provided:-)) to solve the problems. Probably still have one or two in a storage carton somewhere if I looked hard enough.
That was of course in the 80's when exposure to BASIC was almost a given if you used a computer at all. Good luck finding books like that any more (or kids interested in reading them -- "ooooh, shiny PS2, much more interesting than boring typing").
It's kinda sad now how kids never get exposed to programming unless they take the initiative.
Re:Sounds like a great guy!
on
Linus Interviewed
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I think the parent poster may have been refering to chaos theory. A butterfly, through a chain of events can cause a hurricane, without any form of intention.
Isn't it now about to be illegal to go changing peoples' browser settings via the use of spyware? Doesn't this come awfully close to doing the same thing? If it changes how my software behaves, it's awfully close to being malware.
No, it doesn't change the way the software behaves. It doesn't install anything to change the behaviour of your browser, it uses the available features within the browser to achieve an effect (it's not doing anything fancy, it just disables the context menu by cancelling the event from an event handler, loads the "page image" as a background image on a DIV through CSS, and puts an equally sized transparent gif infront of the background image to make it even harder to get at).
It doesn't affect your browser when you use other sites, and nobody is forcing you to use Google to read pages from books. Ergo, they are perfectly within thier rights to do this and I don't think anybody can really point finger and say they are producing something "close to malware".
Now, if this article was about Google invoking the DMCA or some such m'larky on people who managed to save the image, I'd have an issue with it. But as it stands, nothing to see here, move along.
You'd be suprised the number of people who still use MacIE for one reason or another; or at least thats what my graphic design clients say when I tell them that Mac users should be using Mozilla or Safari.
As for Safari, well it's pretty compliant with standards so theres not too much trouble with it, so I hardly ever check in it. It does have (or had, maybe they are fixed now) some glitches though in CSS handling, in that the CSS files get well and truely stuck in cache, which means that it's nigh impossible to tune CSS for it (with the CSS in external files).
If these were real debates, I'd disagree. But the fact is that these are little more than mostly scripted, well rehearsed, mutually and contractually agreed soapbox speeches.
If these were real debates, then it's important that you bring in as many views as possible, not because the "smaller" candidates might have a chance of winning the election, but because they are the ones who will ask the hard questions and to help expose the truth behind the candidates so that the population can make a more informed decision, on all the issues - not just "The War".
If one of those candidates was looking at 20% or more of the likely vote, you can bet your butt that they'd be invited
The debates are run by the two main parties, they contractually agree between themselves, behind closed doors, as to how the debates are run. A 3rd candidate would have to be wielding an very large stick indeed to have any chance of getting in.
I also thought TechTV had made it pretty clear that pearPC was almost unuseable on a machine below 2.5 GHz.
May have been true once, but PearPC has made significant enhancments. I use it for testing websites under Mac IE quite successfully (and more or less usably) on my lowly 1.2 Ghz Duron machine.
He was eventually banned from putting functions in the libraries because he had a habit of working from old files and wiping out our good working copies.
Eek, you had more than one programmer working on the same system, and NO REVISION CONTROL???
Yup. Biased against old people. There's a whole bunch of stupid age related bias in this article.
Well not really, tyically young people *are* more ready to question authority, they are less likely to simply accept the status quo as good enough.
Look for example at world protests, the vast majority of protestors against political entities are who?
Students, that's who, the young people of the society push for the change in the society, while the older people, who were of course once young themselves, are more ready to just "get on with life" and live under the rules.
I would expect that younger people would be predominatly anti-bush, while older people would be more anti-change.
However the question at hand is wether only polling land lines biases polls. Well of course it does, hell polling by phone at all biases polls because your pool has reduced only to those that actually have phones. The only true way of polling is to use the ol shanks pony to get out there and ask people of your demographic. Doing it by phone might be 'good enough', and by that reasoning, doing it by only land-line is also probably 'good enough'.
Ae you targetting it to a specific language? If so, DON'T!
If you issue a practical test, then do it in a completly made-up (or at least unknown) language (nothing arcane line Brainf*ck or anything though unless you are loking for infinitely hardcore people;-)). Even if you just have the candidates write thier code, on paper, in english pseudocode, it would be better that than saying "in C, write this".
Programming is a language-independant skill, do you want somebody who can show they program in this particular language or somebody who can efficiently move into any language without any prior experience.
100 000 is one hundred thousand wherever you are 1 000 000 is one million wherever you are 1 000 000 000 is one billion in America and primarily one thousand million elsewhere.
I don't see how it would be too easy to legally sell or possess the product...What's its legitimate use?
Practical Jokes - and before you say that's not a legitimate use, well, it is - or do you think that all those things you can buy in your local joke shop are "illegitimate" or even illegal?
For example; what about joke disguises, people could use those for robbing banks! Quick, lets round up all those people with joke disguises because there are no legitimate reasons for them owning joke disguises and therefore must be CRIMINALS!
Slashdot Mirror
It's about delegation. The root servers have to hold information about every top level domain (.com, .net, .org, .biz, .us, .uk, .nz ......).
If you were to allow any-old-tld, then the root servers have to do an absolutely mammoth task in serving all lookups for the TLDs.
It is totally unscalable.
No, but the general public (or the media maybe) put the blame on the government for not "heeding" the warning they had.
Government to public: "Meh."
The brain is fully functional even when sliced in two, however it does lead to some really fascinating side effects brought about by the differing functions of the two sides.
In effect, we all have two brains, they do different things but by communication we end up with a single whole brain, once you cut the CC you're back to two brains, with different capabilities. Most of the time you won't notice the difference because the brains compensate adequately, but in certain situations you can expose some truely bizarre features.
(http://www.schiffermd.com/dualbrain.html)
Here's another interesting link with details about one case which through having an unusual development of language in both sides of the brain the experimenters were able to discover that the two brains (after separation) were vastly different in thier ideas, rigt down to what job the person would like to lead (race car driver vs draghtsman!).
http://www.macalester.edu/~psych/whathap/UBNRP/
As the other poster said, no it's not a lobotamy. The procedure is called a Corpus Callosotomy (due to the fact it severes the connections in the Corpus Callosum), and it is still performed in very serious epileptic cases.
It's effective in so far as it will decrease the severity of seizures due to limiting them to the originating side of the brain.
How are we to learn, if we don't experiment? These findings could directly and indirectly fundamentally improve our understanding of how the brain operates, and indeed make it so that we can study the workings of brains up close & personal without being invasive into a living creature - human, rat or otherwise.
Isn't that a good thing?
You kind of remind me of a quote from Steven Hawking regarding something the pope said..
My guess is, you use the electrodes in the petri dish to stimulate the neurons into strengthening the connections when the plane is doing the right thing (straight and level presumadly) and weaken (or just not strengthen) when the plane is doing the wrong thing (crashing).
I believe that by altering the characteristics of the charge applied over the electrodes this effect could be realised.
Eventually the connections will be strengthened in such as way as the plane is flown straight and level.
Nothing to do with pleasure or pain, just artificially causing the correct connections to strengthen.
Of course, IANABS (Brain Surgeon). So I could be completly wrong, it's just how I imagine they could achieve the desired results.
Airliners actually have quite exceptional glide ratios for powered craft, a 747 is in the region of 15:1 (15 units horizontal for 1 unit vertical), better than many light aircraft.
Funny, those commands work just fine on my RedHat, Fedora, Aurora, and Yellow Dog boxen. Then again, I'm using apt4rpm. That's all very well, but on all the boxes I've seen with apt-get for rpm the repositories are somewhat devoid of packages, which kinda defeats the purpose of a package management system.
Does anyone remember all the programming books that used to be aimed at kids?
Yep, I had a few of those, I can't remember the titles, I want to say "Byte Brothers" or something like that. Kids "whodunnit" books where they used BASIC computer programs (source provided
That was of course in the 80's when exposure to BASIC was almost a given if you used a computer at all. Good luck finding books like that any more (or kids interested in reading them -- "ooooh, shiny PS2, much more interesting than boring typing").
It's kinda sad now how kids never get exposed to programming unless they take the initiative.
I think the parent poster may have been refering to chaos theory. A butterfly, through a chain of events can cause a hurricane, without any form of intention.
Google Search
Linus was the butterfly, who through a chain of events caused the hurricane that is Linux, wihout ever intending for that to happen.
Isn't it now about to be illegal to go changing peoples' browser settings via the use of spyware? Doesn't this come awfully close to doing the same thing? If it changes how my software behaves, it's awfully close to being malware.
No, it doesn't change the way the software behaves. It doesn't install anything to change the behaviour of your browser, it uses the available features within the browser to achieve an effect (it's not doing anything fancy, it just disables the context menu by cancelling the event from an event handler, loads the "page image" as a background image on a DIV through CSS, and puts an equally sized transparent gif infront of the background image to make it even harder to get at).
It doesn't affect your browser when you use other sites, and nobody is forcing you to use Google to read pages from books. Ergo, they are perfectly within thier rights to do this and I don't think anybody can really point finger and say they are producing something "close to malware".
Now, if this article was about Google invoking the DMCA or some such m'larky on people who managed to save the image, I'd have an issue with it. But as it stands, nothing to see here, move along.
You'd be suprised the number of people who still use MacIE for one reason or another; or at least thats what my graphic design clients say when I tell them that Mac users should be using Mozilla or Safari.
As for Safari, well it's pretty compliant with standards so theres not too much trouble with it, so I hardly ever check in it. It does have (or had, maybe they are fixed now) some glitches though in CSS handling, in that the CSS files get well and truely stuck in cache, which means that it's nigh impossible to tune CSS for it (with the CSS in external files).
If these were real debates, I'd disagree. But the fact is that these are little more than mostly scripted, well rehearsed, mutually and contractually agreed soapbox speeches.
If these were real debates, then it's important that you bring in as many views as possible, not because the "smaller" candidates might have a chance of winning the election, but because they are the ones who will ask the hard questions and to help expose the truth behind the candidates so that the population can make a more informed decision, on all the issues - not just "The War".
If one of those candidates was looking at 20% or more of the likely vote, you can bet your butt that they'd be invited
The debates are run by the two main parties, they contractually agree between themselves, behind closed doors, as to how the debates are run. A 3rd candidate would have to be wielding an very large stick indeed to have any chance of getting in.
http://www.opendebates.org/
I also thought TechTV had made it pretty clear that pearPC was almost unuseable on a machine below 2.5 GHz.
May have been true once, but PearPC has made significant enhancments. I use it for testing websites under Mac IE quite successfully (and more or less usably) on my lowly 1.2 Ghz Duron machine.
What? You want a thin client, and you suggest using VNC? Ummm, hello, this is what X was designed to do!
http://netstation.sourceforge.net/
BTW: As well as standard X, Netstation will also do TightVNC, SSH, Telnet, Rdesktop RDP, Citrix ICA, Tarantella
PearPC works quite well, and is completely usable even on my crusty old 1.3 gig Duron with 256MB Ram.
When i say usable, it's certainly slow but for doing stuff like checking sites in MacIE etc it's just dandy.
One of these days I'll upgrade my machine and really open'er'up.
He was eventually banned from putting functions in the libraries because he had a habit of working from old files and wiping out our good working copies.
Eek, you had more than one programmer working on the same system, and NO REVISION CONTROL???
Please tell me you at least had backups?
A bag of cash falls out of the back of a cash-courier truck, it contains $100,000 (actually happened recently here), people behind pick up the bag.
Do they get to keep it?
I think not.
Also, nine years old isn't too young to start reading biographies and nonfiction. The daughter is nine MONTHS old.
Yup. Biased against old people. There's a whole bunch of stupid age related bias in this article.
Well not really, tyically young people *are* more ready to question authority, they are less likely to simply accept the status quo as good enough.
Look for example at world protests, the vast majority of protestors against political entities are who?
Students, that's who, the young people of the society push for the change in the society, while the older people, who were of course once young themselves, are more ready to just "get on with life" and live under the rules.
I would expect that younger people would be predominatly anti-bush, while older people would be more anti-change.
However the question at hand is wether only polling land lines biases polls. Well of course it does, hell polling by phone at all biases polls because your pool has reduced only to those that actually have phones. The only true way of polling is to use the ol shanks pony to get out there and ask people of your demographic. Doing it by phone might be 'good enough', and by that reasoning, doing it by only land-line is also probably 'good enough'.
One quick search could have prevented the repeat goodness...
f ie ld&author=&sort=1&op=stories
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?tid=&query=spring
"Austria" and "Australia" sound the same
Eh? Maybe on your planet, but not on mine.
Oss-tree-ah
Oss-tray-lee-ah
Ae you targetting it to a specific language? If so, DON'T!
;-)). Even if you just have the candidates write thier code, on paper, in english pseudocode, it would be better that than saying "in C, write this".
If you issue a practical test, then do it in a completly made-up (or at least unknown) language (nothing arcane line Brainf*ck or anything though unless you are loking for infinitely hardcore people
Programming is a language-independant skill, do you want somebody who can show they program in this particular language or somebody who can efficiently move into any language without any prior experience.
You are confused.
100 000 is one hundred thousand wherever you are
1 000 000 is one million wherever you are
1 000 000 000 is one billion in America and primarily one thousand million elsewhere.
I don't see how it would be too easy to legally sell or possess the product...What's its legitimate use?
Practical Jokes - and before you say that's not a legitimate use, well, it is - or do you think that all those things you can buy in your local joke shop are "illegitimate" or even illegal?
For example; what about joke disguises, people could use those for robbing banks! Quick, lets round up all those people with joke disguises because there are no legitimate reasons for them owning joke disguises and therefore must be CRIMINALS!