Looking back on most tests, they just looked for correct answers, while in the real world, there are few correct answers, just less bad ones, and you need to choose your answer based on trade-offs, and these trade-offs change depending on which other answers you have chosen for other problems.
A better test would be to give a problem that has no correct answer, you are not given the correct tools, some of the requirements are partly contradictory among each other, and you need to have a persuasive argument as to why you answer is a "good" answer, which means also comparing your way to alternative ways.
With ADD or ADHD, stimulants will relax them. The most common drugs for ADD/ADHD are strong stimulants. Give those to regular people and they'll get hyper. You can tell the different between normal and ADD/ADHD with a brain scan, but those will run you around $10k, so most people just takes the doctor's educated guess.
You didn't say anything about "efficient", just costs. What's not to say his employees aren't more efficient? The company I work for charges much more than the competition, but we have the market cornered because of our product quality and great customer service. All that matters is ROI.
What's it like being Amish? You're being recoded in many more ways that are much worse than a camera. Why you specifically care about a camera is weird.
I had a cat that brought back a baby wild rabbit. It carried the rabbit at the scuff like a kitten and was very gentle with it. I was not expecting that based on how excited it got about small animals. My cousin's cat pounced on his hamster and looked about to kill it when he smacked the cat. After that, the cat would groom the hamster and would sleep through the hamster walking all over it.
game studios such as wargaming.net is much more consumer friendly
Yeah, because when you own 1,000 games, you want to register with 1,000 different web sites and manually track every game you own. I want a single management interface for all of games. I no longer purchase any games that are not on Steam or from Blizzard. The last thing I want is to track my games.
We have measured red shifts that indicate a rate of over 2c moving away from us.
No, we have not. There is no defined redshift for speeds faster than c. The largest redshift we have is for the z~1100 for the CMB, which corresponds to a velocity of 0.999998c.
You may want to do a bit of reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Quote: Due to the expansion increasing as distances increase, the distance between two remote galaxies can increase at more than 3×10^8 m/s
This is old news. I assume you're trolling or willfully ignorant.
The past half of a decade involves idle CPUs and GPUs, and people wondering why they're getting low FPS. Because programmers are bad. No one knows how to write scalable code.
There is a line to be drawn between not being a grammar nazi and just mashing the keyboard. Many people draw that line at "at least try to do some proper grammar". I'm pretty good at just reading and ignoring basic mistakes, but like the GP pointed out, it is bad, so bad that it is distracting.
I think it's because space has an average energy of zero, so creating space can be done without consuming energy, but still requires energy to exist in order for it to happen. I could be entirely wrong.
Maybe because without Dark Energy, what we're observing would require energy being created. In other words, to ignore that the energy must already exist, means you accept that the energy is magically being created. We know there is extra energy, but we assume it has already existed. Saying "Dark Energy" does not exist is ludicrous, the only question remaining is "what is it?".
Aether described a medium in space, not space itself. The whole reason the idea was created was because they thought light couldn't travel through the vacuum of space.
I hate black lights that are in line of sight. The entire bulb is a unfocusable blurry bright annoying thing. Even regular florescent light bulbs have an intense blue haze around them. I also hate it when there's overcast because many times the regular light is dim, so my pupils open more to let in the light so I can see, but the clouds are radiating a certain kind of "brightness" that makes my eyes hurt. Other people don't seem to notice it.
We haven't measured things moving away from us faster than light
We have measured red shifts that indicate a rate of over 2c moving away from us. An object moving faster than light can still be seen if it was in our light cone at the time it emitted the light.
I think he was trying to use it as a "for example" instead of an actual valid idea. In order words, pretend there is a uniquely new way of thinking about stuff that does work.
Dark Energy is just the least crazy idea. One of those reasons is that assuming our standard candles are still valid, objects are moving away from us faster than light, which is impossible with currently accepted solid theory. The only way to get this to happen is to allow space itself to expand, which is where Dark Energy comes in. Expanding space takes energy, a very calculatable amount.
If I had to choose between Dark Energy and expanding space or not expanding space and object moving through space faster than c, I'm going to go with Dark Energy until more information is discovered or the form of measurement of the expansion of space is invalidated.
Dark Energy is not a cheat, it is a placeholder. Assuming our measurements are correct, which the discussion of standard candles is challenging, some unknown source of energy is causing our Universe to expand, and that takes a lot of energy. It takes so much energy, that this energy needs to represent 80% of the Universe's total energy.
Unless you plan on challenging the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Society is ethically obligated to take care of its own, it's part of the social contract. So no, evolution won't take care of them, the tax payers will.
Slashdot Mirror
Looking back on most tests, they just looked for correct answers, while in the real world, there are few correct answers, just less bad ones, and you need to choose your answer based on trade-offs, and these trade-offs change depending on which other answers you have chosen for other problems.
A better test would be to give a problem that has no correct answer, you are not given the correct tools, some of the requirements are partly contradictory among each other, and you need to have a persuasive argument as to why you answer is a "good" answer, which means also comparing your way to alternative ways.
With ADD or ADHD, stimulants will relax them. The most common drugs for ADD/ADHD are strong stimulants. Give those to regular people and they'll get hyper. You can tell the different between normal and ADD/ADHD with a brain scan, but those will run you around $10k, so most people just takes the doctor's educated guess.
If you have no peers, you can get lonely and no amount of attitude can completely help a human who is lonely.
You lose consciousness in under 5 seconds of fresh blood getting to the brain. Better eat quickly.
You didn't say anything about "efficient", just costs. What's not to say his employees aren't more efficient? The company I work for charges much more than the competition, but we have the market cornered because of our product quality and great customer service. All that matters is ROI.
Hey may get paid more again in the future, but they're not going to reduce employee's salaries to do so.
As long as each employee brings in more money than they cost, I don't see the issue.
What's it like being Amish? You're being recoded in many more ways that are much worse than a camera. Why you specifically care about a camera is weird.
I had a cat that brought back a baby wild rabbit. It carried the rabbit at the scuff like a kitten and was very gentle with it. I was not expecting that based on how excited it got about small animals. My cousin's cat pounced on his hamster and looked about to kill it when he smacked the cat. After that, the cat would groom the hamster and would sleep through the hamster walking all over it.
Cats can be interesting when it comes to prey.
game studios such as wargaming.net is much more consumer friendly
Yeah, because when you own 1,000 games, you want to register with 1,000 different web sites and manually track every game you own. I want a single management interface for all of games. I no longer purchase any games that are not on Steam or from Blizzard. The last thing I want is to track my games.
We have measured red shifts that indicate a rate of over 2c moving away from us.
No, we have not. There is no defined redshift for speeds faster than c. The largest redshift we have is for the z~1100 for the CMB, which corresponds to a velocity of 0.999998c.
You may want to do a bit of reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... Quote: Due to the expansion increasing as distances increase, the distance between two remote galaxies can increase at more than 3×10^8 m/s
This is old news. I assume you're trolling or willfully ignorant.
The past half of a decade involves idle CPUs and GPUs, and people wondering why they're getting low FPS. Because programmers are bad. No one knows how to write scalable code.
There is a line to be drawn between not being a grammar nazi and just mashing the keyboard. Many people draw that line at "at least try to do some proper grammar". I'm pretty good at just reading and ignoring basic mistakes, but like the GP pointed out, it is bad, so bad that it is distracting.
I think it's because space has an average energy of zero, so creating space can be done without consuming energy, but still requires energy to exist in order for it to happen. I could be entirely wrong.
Maybe because without Dark Energy, what we're observing would require energy being created. In other words, to ignore that the energy must already exist, means you accept that the energy is magically being created. We know there is extra energy, but we assume it has already existed. Saying "Dark Energy" does not exist is ludicrous, the only question remaining is "what is it?".
Aether described a medium in space, not space itself. The whole reason the idea was created was because they thought light couldn't travel through the vacuum of space.
I hate black lights that are in line of sight. The entire bulb is a unfocusable blurry bright annoying thing. Even regular florescent light bulbs have an intense blue haze around them. I also hate it when there's overcast because many times the regular light is dim, so my pupils open more to let in the light so I can see, but the clouds are radiating a certain kind of "brightness" that makes my eyes hurt. Other people don't seem to notice it.
If it can't be falsified nor verified, then it does not exist.
We haven't measured things moving away from us faster than light
We have measured red shifts that indicate a rate of over 2c moving away from us. An object moving faster than light can still be seen if it was in our light cone at the time it emitted the light.
I would rather have faxes fairly applied, like a fixed tax rate on discretionary income.
I think he was trying to use it as a "for example" instead of an actual valid idea. In order words, pretend there is a uniquely new way of thinking about stuff that does work.
Dark Energy is just the least crazy idea. One of those reasons is that assuming our standard candles are still valid, objects are moving away from us faster than light, which is impossible with currently accepted solid theory. The only way to get this to happen is to allow space itself to expand, which is where Dark Energy comes in. Expanding space takes energy, a very calculatable amount.
If I had to choose between Dark Energy and expanding space or not expanding space and object moving through space faster than c, I'm going to go with Dark Energy until more information is discovered or the form of measurement of the expansion of space is invalidated.
Dark Energy is not a cheat, it is a placeholder. Assuming our measurements are correct, which the discussion of standard candles is challenging, some unknown source of energy is causing our Universe to expand, and that takes a lot of energy. It takes so much energy, that this energy needs to represent 80% of the Universe's total energy.
Unless you plan on challenging the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Just an overlap in syntax. "=" is programming typically means assignment while "=" in math means equality.
Society is ethically obligated to take care of its own, it's part of the social contract. So no, evolution won't take care of them, the tax payers will.