After actually having implemented such a methods, it is noticed that nobody ever uses the classified network except for highly official stuff, when the project is done. It seems that all work in progress is just being saved on the non-classified network.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by anything, but I've never heard or seen any sign of people working with classified data on a non-classified network. Except for that Chinese guy who got charged for spying at Sandia.
Being trapped all day in a small grey box while click click clicking on things displayed on a smaller box has adverse health effects? But its so natural, what we evolved for. Not at all like being an animal in a cramped, sterile, never changing zoo environment, endlessly trying to find the door out that never appears.
seasonal correlation means that whatever A is, it'd have to be somehow related to the earths orbital position around the sun.
I was failing to take into account the seasonal correlation, and was thinking only of the correlation with solar activity. I agree that it seems unlikely that planetary orbits would be coupled with anything else relevant, which makes the sun-is-causing it conjecture much more plausible.
An accurate view of what scientists think on a subject can almost never be found in a popular science article, as these tend to be sloppily written by people with very poor understanding of the subjects they write about. And a full accounting can usually not be found in the original papers either, due to limited space and other considerations. So no, I did not think that the scientists were idiots.
I think its less a matter of people believing they can be rich someday, and more a matter of believing that by sucking up to the rich they can be a little better off than other people further down the pyramid. And they're right, in a limited sort of way.
Cut the head off of almost any abusive power structure, and the head will grow back. In that sense power really doesn't flow from the top. In a democracy, its more a conspiracy of the top half against the bottom half. Granted, if people stopped abusing power completely, we'd all be better off. But when presented with the temptation to abuse power, almost all people will take it, to at least some degree. This is why revolutions so often fail to bring improvement. That's how it looks to me anyway.
I didn't 'disbelieve' the hypothesis, say that it was 'wrong', or ignore anything. I called my guess a guess. I also didn't dispute a 'link'. My hypothesis is that the link may be of the 'A causes B and C' kind rather than the 'B causes C' kind.
Here's another guess, possibly inaccurate, but based on what you've said so far: You yourself have an exceedingly shaky grasp of quantum physics, except perhaps at the level of symbol manipulation with no deeper understanding. Consequently, you have no idea whether the idea of neutrinos causing decay changes is plausible or not, and you're staking everything on the correlation, combined with the fact that the sun seems really powerful.
It looks to me like you're guessing also, but are blindingly arrogant on top of it.
I think its more a case of some people perceiving that their own interests coincide with those of the moneyed classes. Its not that they're being hoodwinked so much as that they're making a similar analysis and attempting to strengthen their own position with half-true arguments.
For example: I benefit personally from rule of law, since I don't have a gigantic, well connected, mafia-like family looking out for me. I tend to benefit from policies that exist to benefit the upper middle class, because I'm intelligent and motivated enough to take advantage of them, relatively speaking. My position and well being is arguably more threatened by a permissive culture than an overly conservative one. There is much that I value that conservatives try to defend, notwithstanding that they're a bunch of abusive, thieving bastards in other regards. If I'm not conservative, its probably more a matter of obstinacy than anything else.
It looks to me that most liberals are liberal for analogous reasons. They also peddle in half truths as they attempt to justify their positions, and the wealthier ones engage in a lot of the same self-serving 'casino capitalist' behavior as wealthy conservatives. It appears to me that very, very few people are entirely honest about what motivates them politically.
Suppose you had a detonated a 'nuclear fusion bomb' on the earth, close enough that its effects locally rivaled or exceed that of the sun. Would you expect to see decay rates affected? I've never heard of such a thing. If you have, please lay it out.
If you don't yet have a plausible description of how particles emitted from the sun may be causing the decay change, then you are dealing with a 'mysterious unknown force' anyway.
My guess, which I described as 'poorly informed', was that the effects of the sun are too small. You, on the other hand, seem to be quite sure of yourself. So please lay out your description of how the sun may be causing the decay change, if its anything more than 'the sun is really bright and powerful and godlike, and there's a correlation'.
It's also difficult to imagine what would cause 33-day measurement error cycles.
Incidentally, the Japanese 'phycical', 'emotional', and 'intellectual' biorhythmic cycles are 23, 28, and 33 days. Not that those are very likely to be related to this other effect.
(I've seen evidence that the 28 day cycle is real, though I have no idea what a plausible mechanism would be. I've guessed that maybe the 23 and 33 day cycles are contrived, to make a pseudo-scientific framework for the 28 day cycle.)
If you can meet the following criteria, you're pretty much guaranteed a research grant:
1. Speaks to a perceived counter-terrorism need 2. Concept works at least a little bit, on carefully selected, unrealistic, synthetic data 3. Appears plausible to someone who either doesn't understand the science involved, or isn't interested in the idea's viability for real applications 4. Promises to benefit the resume of someone in the government, such as by making them author of a conference paper without them having to do any research or writing 5. Your resume must be credible looking from the outside, so that everyone's ass is covered
Its unrealistic to assume that an idea makes much sense just because someone's working on it. Some ideas may pan out in a positive manner, most are never intended to. It doesn't matter to most of the people involved, because they're doing fun 'science' and getting paid.
Another possibility would be that some other influence is affecting both the decay rates and the solar activity. If I had to make a poorly informed guess, I would pick that over the idea of the sun influencing the decay rates.
Assuming this decay rate thing is real, and not some subtle misunderstanding about the measuring technique, am I the only one who thinks this is a fantastic result?
It would make as much sense as Newt Gringrich having an affair with an intern while trying to get Clinton impeached for the same offense. Ego is an amazing thing. Once you start thinking of yourself as a Great Indispensible Man, you believe you deserve to have anything you set your eyes on.
Trouble is, as I see it, people complain when they're getting the short end of the stick, but almost always sell out when they get a chance to grab the long end. "The rest of us" can't beat the bastard elites, even though in theory we're stronger than them, because every time a few of us get a little leverage we switch sides.
One problem is that DNA variation isn't uniformly distributed across all population samples. Suppose a defendant has a 1 in a million match, relative to the 'general' population. Usually, the population that had access to the victim and motive is much more closely related to the defendant than the general population. Suppose for example that both defendant and victim are members of a small ethnic minority. Do prosecutors and defense attorneys take this into account correctly?
In other arenas, the same issue applies to identity verification by fingerprint, automatic face recognition, or other means.
I wish the 'Pirate Party' would stop calling itself that. Piracy is seriously wrong - there's nothing glamorous about it. By equating song and movie downloading with piracy, they surrender the argument to those who say they're a bunch of thieves.
And wikileaks should have been more careful about what they leaked. Their sloppiness doesn't help the cause of peace, freedom, or justice either.
Now that the pirates and leakers have combined forces, the mud on one will stick to to the other. Aside from the heightened press attention for the pirate party, I can't see how that's good. And the heightened press attention will be bad if the real message doesn't get out.
I agree that taking away licenses would be better in some regards than the alcohol interlock system. The problem with the latter is its profitable to the people administering it. When the state profits from law enforcement, it corrupts the process, and the eventually punishments tend not to get administered justly.
Many alcohol interlock systems include surveillance cameras. Should we also have surveillance cameras to enforce 'hands free' laws? I don't like the way people are growing comfortable with being monitored all the time, and feel that to be more of a danger to my long term safety than drunk driving. I think its not a matter of if the surveillance state we're building gets misused, but when. Even though I also agree that alcohol misuse is at least as serious of a problem.
Whats next? Entire cultures seeing suicide as something cool that should be tried at least once by anyone?
In my view that's basically what recreational drug use is, alcohol included. Its just too slow for most people to see it.
Much of what people do to earn money, like patent trolling, isn't real work in the sense that it actually adds value to the system. It just games the system, making one's own piece of the pie bigger, for a time, while the pie gets smaller. Gradually the system decays. How is this related to drug use? You're more content that your professional life is hollow if you can fill the void with after-hours partying. And the good feeling that real work can provide doesn't mean as much to you if you if you've been finding your good feelings in other diversions. You forget what real accomplishment feels like, and even if you remember, at some point it becomes nearly impossible to find it when the environment you're in is no longer structured towards that ends. But we all need to feel good, so we cling tighter to what has been slowly destroying us, while justifying it.
Pleasure is the positive feedback your body gives you when you do successful things like eat or procreate. Its like currency for biologically successful behavior. Any activity that gives you significant pleasure without contributing towards your well being in some meaningful sense is poison, because its counterfeit. It doesn't even matter if the thing is chemically addictive or has any other nasty side effects. Just the fact that it feels good but doesn't actually make you healthier dilutes your ability to choose other worthwhile things. Gradually you can no longer find the motivation for honest endeavor.
Prohibition doesn't fix the problem - it creates crime, particularly in weaker economies that supply the drugs. Puritanism doesn't fix it. Where does one draw the line? Recreational sex? Video games? Chewing gum? Music? We have to proceed from where we are, and trying to go cold turkey on vanity would make most of us deathly miserable. But at least understanding our situation a little better helps I think.
I've been told there's already some talk of that in scandanavian countries. More talk than here in the US anyway.
I despise drunkenness. But that doesn't give me the right to fuck over people who I think drink too much. Unfortunately, I think most people view drunk drivers the way they view smokers, or some classes of foreign hethen: their behavior is bad, therefore we are justified in however we want to treat them.
I think there's good arguments on both sides for this kind of thing for convicted drunk drivers. But I agree it's headed in a bad direction.
You're joking, right? Hard to tell here sometimes.
When the coal industry self-regulates, all coal mines are operated under horrible operating conditions, so your only choice is still the manure farm. The self-regulation model only works if the mines are run by perfectly market-rational individuals, and if there are no practical entry barriers to starting new mining companies. Neither is the case.
Slashdot Mirror
After actually having implemented such a methods, it is noticed that nobody ever uses the classified network except for highly official stuff, when the project is done. It seems that all work in progress is just being saved on the non-classified network.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by anything, but I've never heard or seen any sign of people working with classified data on a non-classified network. Except for that Chinese guy who got charged for spying at Sandia.
Being trapped all day in a small grey box while click click clicking on things displayed on a smaller box has adverse health effects? But its so natural, what we evolved for. Not at all like being an animal in a cramped, sterile, never changing zoo environment, endlessly trying to find the door out that never appears.
seasonal correlation means that whatever A is, it'd have to be somehow related to the earths orbital position around the sun.
I was failing to take into account the seasonal correlation, and was thinking only of the correlation with solar activity. I agree that it seems unlikely that planetary orbits would be coupled with anything else relevant, which makes the sun-is-causing it conjecture much more plausible.
An accurate view of what scientists think on a subject can almost never be found in a popular science article, as these tend to be sloppily written by people with very poor understanding of the subjects they write about. And a full accounting can usually not be found in the original papers either, due to limited space and other considerations. So no, I did not think that the scientists were idiots.
I think its less a matter of people believing they can be rich someday, and more a matter of believing that by sucking up to the rich they can be a little better off than other people further down the pyramid. And they're right, in a limited sort of way.
Cut the head off of almost any abusive power structure, and the head will grow back. In that sense power really doesn't flow from the top. In a democracy, its more a conspiracy of the top half against the bottom half. Granted, if people stopped abusing power completely, we'd all be better off. But when presented with the temptation to abuse power, almost all people will take it, to at least some degree. This is why revolutions so often fail to bring improvement. That's how it looks to me anyway.
I didn't 'disbelieve' the hypothesis, say that it was 'wrong', or ignore anything. I called my guess a guess. I also didn't dispute a 'link'. My hypothesis is that the link may be of the 'A causes B and C' kind rather than the 'B causes C' kind.
Here's another guess, possibly inaccurate, but based on what you've said so far: You yourself have an exceedingly shaky grasp of quantum physics, except perhaps at the level of symbol manipulation with no deeper understanding. Consequently, you have no idea whether the idea of neutrinos causing decay changes is plausible or not, and you're staking everything on the correlation, combined with the fact that the sun seems really powerful.
It looks to me like you're guessing also, but are blindingly arrogant on top of it.
I think its more a case of some people perceiving that their own interests coincide with those of the moneyed classes. Its not that they're being hoodwinked so much as that they're making a similar analysis and attempting to strengthen their own position with half-true arguments.
For example: I benefit personally from rule of law, since I don't have a gigantic, well connected, mafia-like family looking out for me. I tend to benefit from policies that exist to benefit the upper middle class, because I'm intelligent and motivated enough to take advantage of them, relatively speaking. My position and well being is arguably more threatened by a permissive culture than an overly conservative one. There is much that I value that conservatives try to defend, notwithstanding that they're a bunch of abusive, thieving bastards in other regards. If I'm not conservative, its probably more a matter of obstinacy than anything else.
It looks to me that most liberals are liberal for analogous reasons. They also peddle in half truths as they attempt to justify their positions, and the wealthier ones engage in a lot of the same self-serving 'casino capitalist' behavior as wealthy conservatives. It appears to me that very, very few people are entirely honest about what motivates them politically.
Right. In which case it wouldn't be accurate to say that the sun is causing decay rate differences.
Perhaps the neutrino flux could affect the detector also, without affecting the decay rate, though I have no idea about that.
Suppose you had a detonated a 'nuclear fusion bomb' on the earth, close enough that its effects locally rivaled or exceed that of the sun. Would you expect to see decay rates affected? I've never heard of such a thing. If you have, please lay it out.
If you don't yet have a plausible description of how particles emitted from the sun may be causing the decay change, then you are dealing with a 'mysterious unknown force' anyway.
My guess, which I described as 'poorly informed', was that the effects of the sun are too small. You, on the other hand, seem to be quite sure of yourself. So please lay out your description of how the sun may be causing the decay change, if its anything more than 'the sun is really bright and powerful and godlike, and there's a correlation'.
It's also difficult to imagine what would cause 33-day measurement error cycles.
Incidentally, the Japanese 'phycical', 'emotional', and 'intellectual' biorhythmic cycles are 23, 28, and 33 days. Not that those are very likely to be related to this other effect.
(I've seen evidence that the 28 day cycle is real, though I have no idea what a plausible mechanism would be. I've guessed that maybe the 23 and 33 day cycles are contrived, to make a pseudo-scientific framework for the 28 day cycle.)
If you can meet the following criteria, you're pretty much guaranteed a research grant:
1. Speaks to a perceived counter-terrorism need
2. Concept works at least a little bit, on carefully selected, unrealistic, synthetic data
3. Appears plausible to someone who either doesn't understand the science involved, or isn't interested in the idea's viability for real applications
4. Promises to benefit the resume of someone in the government, such as by making them author of a conference paper without them having to do any research or writing
5. Your resume must be credible looking from the outside, so that everyone's ass is covered
Its unrealistic to assume that an idea makes much sense just because someone's working on it. Some ideas may pan out in a positive manner, most are never intended to. It doesn't matter to most of the people involved, because they're doing fun 'science' and getting paid.
Strong Magnetic Fields and High temperatures can influence the Weak Nuclear force, causing it to change.
We have already coupled the forces of ElectroMagnetism and the Weak force in particle accelerators, why is this of any surprise?
The sun's magnetic field wouldn't be even remotely strong enough to cause the observed effect on earth. Likewise for seasonal temperature differences.
Another possibility would be that some other influence is affecting both the decay rates and the solar activity. If I had to make a poorly informed guess, I would pick that over the idea of the sun influencing the decay rates.
Assuming this decay rate thing is real, and not some subtle misunderstanding about the measuring technique, am I the only one who thinks this is a fantastic result?
It would make as much sense as Newt Gringrich having an affair with an intern while trying to get Clinton impeached for the same offense. Ego is an amazing thing. Once you start thinking of yourself as a Great Indispensible Man, you believe you deserve to have anything you set your eyes on.
Trouble is, as I see it, people complain when they're getting the short end of the stick, but almost always sell out when they get a chance to grab the long end. "The rest of us" can't beat the bastard elites, even though in theory we're stronger than them, because every time a few of us get a little leverage we switch sides.
One problem is that DNA variation isn't uniformly distributed across all population samples. Suppose a defendant has a 1 in a million match, relative to the 'general' population. Usually, the population that had access to the victim and motive is much more closely related to the defendant than the general population. Suppose for example that both defendant and victim are members of a small ethnic minority. Do prosecutors and defense attorneys take this into account correctly?
In other arenas, the same issue applies to identity verification by fingerprint, automatic face recognition, or other means.
Good points, thanks. And good luck for the pirate party.
Since the activities of wikileaks firstly affect the united states, that's where I was thinking about perceptions of mud though.
Unfortunately, you speak for some of us, but not for all of us. Technology geeks develop this shit.
I wish the 'Pirate Party' would stop calling itself that. Piracy is seriously wrong - there's nothing glamorous about it. By equating song and movie downloading with piracy, they surrender the argument to those who say they're a bunch of thieves.
And wikileaks should have been more careful about what they leaked. Their sloppiness doesn't help the cause of peace, freedom, or justice either.
Now that the pirates and leakers have combined forces, the mud on one will stick to to the other. Aside from the heightened press attention for the pirate party, I can't see how that's good. And the heightened press attention will be bad if the real message doesn't get out.
I agree that taking away licenses would be better in some regards than the alcohol interlock system. The problem with the latter is its profitable to the people administering it. When the state profits from law enforcement, it corrupts the process, and the eventually punishments tend not to get administered justly.
Many alcohol interlock systems include surveillance cameras. Should we also have surveillance cameras to enforce 'hands free' laws? I don't like the way people are growing comfortable with being monitored all the time, and feel that to be more of a danger to my long term safety than drunk driving. I think its not a matter of if the surveillance state we're building gets misused, but when. Even though I also agree that alcohol misuse is at least as serious of a problem.
Whats next? Entire cultures seeing suicide as something cool that should be tried at least once by anyone?
In my view that's basically what recreational drug use is, alcohol included. Its just too slow for most people to see it.
Much of what people do to earn money, like patent trolling, isn't real work in the sense that it actually adds value to the system. It just games the system, making one's own piece of the pie bigger, for a time, while the pie gets smaller. Gradually the system decays. How is this related to drug use? You're more content that your professional life is hollow if you can fill the void with after-hours partying. And the good feeling that real work can provide doesn't mean as much to you if you if you've been finding your good feelings in other diversions. You forget what real accomplishment feels like, and even if you remember, at some point it becomes nearly impossible to find it when the environment you're in is no longer structured towards that ends. But we all need to feel good, so we cling tighter to what has been slowly destroying us, while justifying it.
Pleasure is the positive feedback your body gives you when you do successful things like eat or procreate. Its like currency for biologically successful behavior. Any activity that gives you significant pleasure without contributing towards your well being in some meaningful sense is poison, because its counterfeit. It doesn't even matter if the thing is chemically addictive or has any other nasty side effects. Just the fact that it feels good but doesn't actually make you healthier dilutes your ability to choose other worthwhile things. Gradually you can no longer find the motivation for honest endeavor.
Prohibition doesn't fix the problem - it creates crime, particularly in weaker economies that supply the drugs. Puritanism doesn't fix it. Where does one draw the line? Recreational sex? Video games? Chewing gum? Music? We have to proceed from where we are, and trying to go cold turkey on vanity would make most of us deathly miserable. But at least understanding our situation a little better helps I think.
I've been told there's already some talk of that in scandanavian countries. More talk than here in the US anyway.
I despise drunkenness. But that doesn't give me the right to fuck over people who I think drink too much. Unfortunately, I think most people view drunk drivers the way they view smokers, or some classes of foreign hethen: their behavior is bad, therefore we are justified in however we want to treat them.
I think there's good arguments on both sides for this kind of thing for convicted drunk drivers. But I agree it's headed in a bad direction.
Two teachers at the school my mom taught in got seriously sick and a third one died due to a mold problem.
No, you misunderstand. "Use By Humans", which was to have been their 4th full-length release in two decades, has been delayed 800,000 years.
I hope this is what you had in mind, because this is what you're getting.
You're joking, right? Hard to tell here sometimes.
When the coal industry self-regulates, all coal mines are operated under horrible operating conditions, so your only choice is still the manure farm. The self-regulation model only works if the mines are run by perfectly market-rational individuals, and if there are no practical entry barriers to starting new mining companies. Neither is the case.
Yes, but that is not our situation now. As corrupt as it is, the government looks to me like a pretty good reflection of the people.