Sexual selection relies on having sex in the first place.:)
Evolution is always weak on those "why" questions.
Men produce poetry because women love it, so those that can produce have higher chances of having sex, thus "poetry" genes spread.
Women love poetry because by knowing how to spot it, they have higher chances of having sex with those that contain high quality "poetry" genes, and thus their male children will again be more likely to reproduce in the next generation.
So, both "poetry" and "poetry loving" genes spread together, and evolve together in a runaway process, that can be really fast. Exactly the same argument goes for humor. Yes, this is a cyclical process that feeds itself, so you need something that started it all, and this can be something random at the start, and this can be a really small difference, like 0,01% higher chance of reproduction if you use a lot of rime, and after that small initial start, a positive feedback loop takes over.
This explains why the whole human brain evolved, since, it was already sufficiently advanced 100.000 years ago for survival. However, if a small change occurs and women and men start looking for more 'intelligent' mates, then you have a runaway process, and a very rapid evolution of human intelligence.
Isn't this wonderful! Human brain evolved not to kill tigers, but in fact to attract and select the opposite sex. Isn't it obvious that this is what brains are mostly used for?:)
If one could evolve poems, one could do the same with all other forms of written human language, since poetry seems to be the hardest of them all. And you would have AI.
It is obvious that even the code for this evolution would have to be evolved, and program that would do this evolution could be breed too, etc, etc, up to some pretty simple program that will start it all.
This is the missing key: When you evolve programs, they must include both the code that produces results, and code that evaluates those results. This way your results have no ceiling and can surpass humans.
If human intelligence is used to judge the results, then how can we get anything beyond human intelligence (apart from a faster human intelligence)?
Lately it is becoming clear that sexual selection is playing a much greater part than previously thought. In fact, Darwin himself had this in his work, but was largely ignored later, probably because it was about sex.
It is logical. To have children, you must both survive AND reproduce. In the second part of this, the largest influence in your success is in the hands (or better say minds) of the opposite sex. The human instance of your opposite sex does have intelligence (although it often does not look so.)
There is also an excellent theory that says that, in fact, the human mind itself is a product of sexual selection, and this nicely explains humor, art, poetry, language, as those are all things that attract us to the opposite sex.
Also, if you actually take a look at the situation of humans, including most intelligent animals, the biggest competition comes not from some random environmental factors, but from the members of your own species. You compete against other guys for sex. Even survival itself is not "intelligence free", as some of your predators can be, and usually are, intelligent.
I recommend those two books on this topic: "Mating Mind" and "Red Queen".
Re:George Carlin quote
on
Isn't It Ironic?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If the truck was delivering sugar, he is the victim of an oddly poetic coincidence.
I guess I will never understand irony. He was afraid that sugar INSIDE his body will kill him, but, actually, sugar OUTSIDE of his body did it. Isn't that ironic?
(I am looking at this definition from the link) (1) incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result (2) : an event or result marked by such incongruity
no. the term "endowment effect" would better describe it.
take this example. you are a peacefull person, you would not kill another human. but then there is this ethnic group that you hate so much that you want to kill them. (this is cognitive dissonance) how do you resolve this? well, you go and kill them anyway, because THEY ARE NOT HUMAN!!! (opinions are hard to change, you will NOT change your belief that you can not kill another human, you tend to stay with the familiar)
another example, your brother is a 'nice person', however so it happens that he kills somebody. (again, cognitive dissonance.) well, he obviously had a DAMN GOOD REASON. (again, you tend to stay with the familiar).
this endowment effect works like the information (beliefs) you have in you work as filters for all incoming information.
another way to say all this is that BELIEFS are impossible to change!
than there is this question: why do you actually have those beliefs that you have? its because they were there first! IT IS THAT SIMPLE.
The idea that spectrum is a limitless resource is a myth, however.
no, it is not. you just have to make smaller cells. there is no limit (in theory) how small a "cell" can be.
where with normal bands you can't have the same frequency in neighbouring cells, with spread spectrum you can. this gives the spread spectrum a 7 times more data boost from the start. (actually more like 3-4)
Having lots of spread-spectrum devices in the same area and frequency band will affect the performance of these devices.
sure, but, oh, how much better spread spectrum devices are in this regard compared to "narrow band". you can actually tune to multiple transmiters on the same frequency. also, multiple path signal (off the buildings, etc) is actually boosting the signal, and does not interfere with it as with old tech, so you can transmit with less power.
The author does say as much somewhere, but mostly he talks as if the spectrum will bear an unlimited number of users, which is bollocks.
you can easily have 50 times more data transmited compared to old methods. with meshes you can probably do 100 to 1000 times more.
let's say that you put a transmiter and receiver in each house. then you can transmit with low power, and with routing and a new economy model that would support it, everybody can, in fact, have the complete spectrum for himself. think about it, each house a cell.
You try to solve it. Did anybody find a best TETRIS strategy? One that is statistically the best way to play, and that can give you the best move for each position.
At the geosynchronous orbit you can move to any other point on that orbit in a simple way. An easy push will do. Just be careful not to hit any satellites.
So, you can build two elevators, one for going up, and another one for going down. Trains/cars/vehicles could easily be transported from one to the other. This way you could have bandwidth limited only by the cable strength.
Also, that spot at the cable in the geoshnchronous orbit would be a perfect for a space station, which would easily grow because it is cheap to send new modules up. You can build hotels and houses there! I guess you could even suspend an electricity cable on the ribbon.
this is how an anti-unix ad gets to be a pro-unix add on slashodot. it says "put other *unix* boxes to/dev/null", now is this a response to microsoft's ads?
people, this is an anti-linux ad.
Re:rebooting will not die, yet.
on
No More Rebooting?
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
i wonder why was this moderated to -1, flaimbait?
well, the parent said this:
I have to back that up. Granted, I've had problems with it on Win2k, nowadays it works like a charm (very mysterious since I've only installed new games and silly stuff like ADSL).
Linux is way, way behind Win2K and WinXP. Too bad some people's egoes are too stuck up where the sun don't shine to admit it. I have much more respect for people who run Linux because it's Free Software (as in GPL/open source). Generally, Linux is playing catch-up when it could have been superior. It's just a matter of standardizing the platform (APIs, toolkits, wheels) a bit more. But how do you do that when everybody is working on their own thing? I think Linux is great when you want to learn CS, but it's not for the common man yet.
It's a bit unfair to bash "linux" though. "Linux" is doing okay, it's a very nice performing kernel.
but it is also the most aclaimed one... and most active!:)
search engines and AI
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1
At what point do search engines become self-conscious? People are already having conversations with search engines, and it is even fun!
Interlinked nature of the web is similar to the interlinked nature of a human brain, where each word holds associations with other words and concepts. Search engines only add 'life' to this structure.
Google is the best troubleshooting engine while programming and fixing obscure error messages.
I think that search engines are the most intelligent things today.
but why bother, when gcc + emacs is in the labs and you can get it free at home?
Perhaps you get VS.NET simply because it is better? Better development enviroment. Perhaps you can get a job easier? Perhaps you can be more productive?
Slashdot Mirror
Sexual selection relies on having sex in the first place. :)
:)
Evolution is always weak on those "why" questions.
Men produce poetry because women love it, so those that can produce have higher chances of having sex, thus "poetry" genes spread.
Women love poetry because by knowing how to spot it, they have higher chances of having sex with those that contain high quality "poetry" genes, and thus their male children will again be more likely to reproduce in the next generation.
So, both "poetry" and "poetry loving" genes spread together, and evolve together in a runaway process, that can be really fast. Exactly the same argument goes for humor. Yes, this is a cyclical process that feeds itself, so you need something that started it all, and this can be something random at the start, and this can be a really small difference, like 0,01% higher chance of reproduction if you use a lot of rime, and after that small initial start, a positive feedback loop takes over.
This explains why the whole human brain evolved, since, it was already sufficiently advanced 100.000 years ago for survival. However, if a small change occurs and women and men start looking for more 'intelligent' mates, then you have a runaway process, and a very rapid evolution of human intelligence.
Isn't this wonderful! Human brain evolved not to kill tigers, but in fact to attract and select the opposite sex. Isn't it obvious that this is what brains are mostly used for?
If one could evolve poems, one could do the same with all other forms of written human language, since poetry seems to be the hardest of them all. And you would have AI.
It is obvious that even the code for this evolution would have to be evolved, and program that would do this evolution could be breed too, etc, etc, up to some pretty simple program that will start it all.
This is the missing key: When you evolve programs, they must include both the code that produces results, and code that evaluates those results. This way your results have no ceiling and can surpass humans.
If human intelligence is used to judge the results, then how can we get anything beyond human intelligence (apart from a faster human intelligence)?
Not true.
Lately it is becoming clear that sexual selection is playing a much greater part than previously thought. In fact, Darwin himself had this in his work, but was largely ignored later, probably because it was about sex.
It is logical. To have children, you must both survive AND reproduce. In the second part of this, the largest influence in your success is in the hands (or better say minds) of the opposite sex. The human instance of your opposite sex does have intelligence (although it often does not look so.)
There is also an excellent theory that says that, in fact, the human mind itself is a product of sexual selection, and this nicely explains humor, art, poetry, language, as those are all things that attract us to the opposite sex.
Also, if you actually take a look at the situation of humans, including most intelligent animals, the biggest competition comes not from some random environmental factors, but from the members of your own species. You compete against other guys for sex. Even survival itself is not "intelligence free", as some of your predators can be, and usually are, intelligent.
I recommend those two books on this topic: "Mating Mind" and "Red Queen".
If the truck was delivering sugar, he is the victim of an oddly poetic coincidence.
I guess I will never understand irony. He was afraid that sugar INSIDE his body will kill him, but, actually, sugar OUTSIDE of his body did it. Isn't that ironic?
(I am looking at this definition from the link)
(1) incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result (2) : an event or result marked by such incongruity
...the one who gets ALL the spam is YOU!
No, wait, something's wrong here.
no. the term "endowment effect" would better describe it.
take this example. you are a peacefull person, you would not kill another human. but then there is this ethnic group that you hate so much that you want to kill them. (this is cognitive dissonance) how do you resolve this? well, you go and kill them anyway, because THEY ARE NOT HUMAN!!! (opinions are hard to change, you will NOT change your belief that you can not kill another human, you tend to stay with the familiar)
another example, your brother is a 'nice person', however so it happens that he kills somebody. (again, cognitive dissonance.) well, he obviously had a DAMN GOOD REASON. (again, you tend to stay with the familiar).
this endowment effect works like the information (beliefs) you have in you work as filters for all incoming information.
another way to say all this is that BELIEFS are impossible to change!
than there is this question: why do you actually have those beliefs that you have? its because they were there first! IT IS THAT SIMPLE.
Why don't we put two copies of the same human to talk to each other, to see if that human is really intelligent?
The idea that spectrum is a limitless resource is a myth, however.
no, it is not. you just have to make smaller cells. there is no limit (in theory) how small a "cell" can be.
where with normal bands you can't have the same frequency in neighbouring cells, with spread spectrum you can. this gives the spread spectrum a 7 times more data boost from the start. (actually more like 3-4)
Having lots of spread-spectrum devices in the same area and frequency band will affect the performance of these devices.
sure, but, oh, how much better spread spectrum devices are in this regard compared to "narrow band". you can actually tune to multiple transmiters on the same frequency. also, multiple path signal (off the buildings, etc) is actually boosting the signal, and does not interfere with it as with old tech, so you can transmit with less power.
The author does say as much somewhere, but mostly he talks as if the spectrum will bear an unlimited number of users, which is bollocks.
you can easily have 50 times more data transmited compared to old methods. with meshes you can probably do 100 to 1000 times more.
let's say that you put a transmiter and receiver in each house. then you can transmit with low power, and with routing and a new economy model that would support it, everybody can, in fact, have the complete spectrum for himself. think about it, each house a cell.
You try to solve it. Did anybody find a best TETRIS strategy? One that is statistically the best way to play, and that can give you the best move for each position.
Is TETRIS solvable in this way at all?
I don't get it.
10 in base 12 is 'A'. where's the funny bit?
...only giving you half the story...
There are hundreds of fixes, and a change in the EULA.
Yeah, I would say those are of about equal weight. Year right.
you can try it with a CD. not everyone has a mirror aroung the desk, but everyone has a CD for sure.
At the geosynchronous orbit you can move to any other point on that orbit in a simple way. An easy push will do. Just be careful not to hit any satellites.
So, you can build two elevators, one for going up, and another one for going down. Trains/cars/vehicles could easily be transported from one to the other. This way you could have bandwidth limited only by the cable strength.
Also, that spot at the cable in the geoshnchronous orbit would be a perfect for a space station, which would easily grow because it is cheap to send new modules up. You can build hotels and houses there! I guess you could even suspend an electricity cable on the ribbon.
This would really be great.
i just went to check out this site, and somehow i ended up at
:)
www.divx.com
and my first reaction was, "hey, this is a really cool developer's site!"
we are so lucky that there is no dll-hell on linux.
I just want a proof that money can't make me happy.
You schmuck.
Everybody knows that Xtreme Programming is programming for Windows XP. (using Athlong XP is optional)
:)
but the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
this is how an anti-unix ad gets to be a pro-unix add on slashodot. it says "put other *unix* boxes to
people, this is an anti-linux ad.
well, the parent said this:
I have to back that up. Granted, I've had problems with it on Win2k, nowadays it works like a charm (very mysterious since I've only installed new games and silly stuff like ADSL).
Linux is way, way behind Win2K and WinXP. Too bad some people's egoes are too stuck up where the sun don't shine to admit it. I have much more respect for people who run Linux because it's Free Software (as in GPL/open source). Generally, Linux is playing catch-up when it could have been superior. It's just a matter of standardizing the platform (APIs, toolkits, wheels) a bit more. But how do you do that when everybody is working on their own thing? I think Linux is great when you want to learn CS, but it's not for the common man yet.
It's a bit unfair to bash "linux" though. "Linux" is doing okay, it's a very nice performing kernel.
groundhog day is the only track.
:)
but it is also the most aclaimed one... and most active!
conversations with search engines, and it is even fun!
Interlinked nature of the web is similar to the interlinked nature of a human brain, where each word holds associations with other words and concepts. Search engines only add 'life' to this structure.
Google is the best troubleshooting engine while programming and fixing obscure error messages.
I think that search engines are the most intelligent things today.
Except in all those statically linked versions in who knows how many programs.
This can't be true, bacause WE ALL KNOW that open source is more secure, I mean, 50 Windows mail viruses are much worse.
Just kidding.
but why bother, when gcc + emacs is in the labs and you can get it free at home?
Perhaps you get VS.NET simply because it is better? Better development enviroment. Perhaps you can get a job easier? Perhaps you can be more productive?
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/printer/16564/