Actually the results of studies linking video games and aggression have been posted on Slashdot (you can find a lot of studies wit Google). Also I'm not biased, I clearly said it pointed both ways and I obviously mentioned that there is a chance that a child that is too young will imitate what is seen on any media. Also, I speak from personal experience (both with knowledge of psychology/statistics and my own observations). One thing I have noticed is that the "aggression" in video games is caused by loosing. When football fans show violence, it's not because violent media has a direct play in it, it's because the ref made a bad call, or some player made a dumb move.
Following the little warning, it should read, Warning: this link has been established with biased experiments and insufficient data, as well as lack of scientific analysis. Experiments have pointed both ways (yet we have cherry picked this one) and to this day, many dolts firmly believe that correlation implies causation. You can however have faith in the fact that if your children are young enough, they may be as stupid as the chain of idiots who have wasted your tax money on this crap. This entails that, like lemmings, without proper guidance/responsibility, they will most likely attempt (and fail) to pick up a hooker and shoot her in the face to avoid paying the fees, following an uninterrupted session of GTA. If they get closer to success than desired, no matter how hilarious it may be, it is YOUR responsibility, not the source of this media.
You mean some scientist out there almost got laid!? This IS one for the headlines! I just hope we'll be able to replicate the results with ease. God knows how many infeasible experiments big organizations have dangled in front of my low budget lab.
I'm not afraid of health insurance and genetics
on
My Genome, My Self?
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I'll just show up with my steel-clad genes and live an extremely unhealthy life style, then use my health insurance funds to undo the damage. Take THAT "the system"!
For the record, I think that "terrorists" have seriously considered the airplane suicide bombing to be so 2001. If they were seriously thinking about killing masses of people they would go with the new trend of remote detonated car bombs. It's been "in" since the Iraq war, and there is NO security measures implemented against it (sound familiar?).
in other news, a shiny new Lamborghini stand out in a school parking lot. Seriously how is it news that something expensive (i.e. typically rare) stimulates the brain more. Anything that's rare, out of place, or new typically grabs more of our attention. It's a natural response from our neocortex.
I honestly believe that the CS teaching will start out bad. There are few teachers who can tell a computer from a hole in the ground, and fewer that can program to a good degree. However, the initiative for teachers to know about computers must start here. I had a teacher who taught AP computer programming with literally no knowledge about programming. He made countless errors and would have to teach himself in the middle of class. But you know what? The interested students actually learned decent programming, all the way up to mid level object oriented programming. What is so funny is that his lack of knowledge was even a benefit. He didn't know that Java was part of the curriculum because he didn't know there was such a thing as more then one programming language. He just picked up a c++ book and taught us that. After we finished learning about objects and their parameters, he decided to do interfaces with a library he downloaded and found out about VB. Since then, he suddenly realized there were a myriad of languages out there. By the end of the year we all learned c++, VB, Java (he finally found out), and he gave us a choice of the other programming languages to learn (I learned AUTOIT and my friend learned python). And he went from not knowing about the alt+tab trick, to writing a autoit script that would lock the computer down and beep like mad when the keyword "game" was typed. This may be the best case scenario, but as long as there is are a sliver of ambitious people distributed throughout the system, there will be a massive amount of progress made with this choice.
The other solution is to use asshole seeking missiles on the botnets. Of course it would probably end up leading astray from the pricks with the checklist that always responds to peoples' solutions to spam.
You can teach them a scripting language like autoit (http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/downloads.shtml). The reason for teaching them this language is very simple: it's easy to do a lot of things with very little code. Since they're young, you'll find that even the interested and capable students get bored. If you want your computer to beep, tell it how load in the parameters, if you want the mouse to move, just say where (and how fast) in the arguments, and if you need a gui, just say how big and where etc. You can also do advanced things such as networking with ease. I remember the woes of text-only learning. I would have killed to get an assignment where I can truly play with the computer. However if you want the kids to learn a powerful language right off the bat, one that requires skill to master well, there is no better alternative than c++. It's slightly better than c (not performance wise of course) since object oriented programming is very important. I don't really need to justify c++ however, since you can find articles praising it anywhere you look. If you really want to make it fun, just look around for libraries that they can play with. I have to say, you never really feel computer savvy until you go beyond text programming.
Yes because if drugs weren't made illegal, any poor bastard could go to nearly any city and get them. Oops that's already the case. If our feeble attempts to stop drugs was a war, we'd already loose, because you will never win until you stop nearly all drugs from being sold, which will NEVER happen. We should at least make them legal in some shithole state like Arkansas so that all the junkies move there.
That would mean they only loose 99 cents a pop. Since they're assholes, I was thinking of selling them one dollar asswhooping insurance, then beating the crap out of them and raising my rates.
Anyways cloning humans isn't against human rights or unethical. Would you debate your existence if someone told you that you were cloned? What if humanity lost its ability to naturally procreate? Would it suddenly change to not being against God's will? Humans play God every day when we take or prolong life, and I say if it's for the better of humanity, I'm sure God would be cool with it.
I know many people don't like their rts in 3D, but Homeworld is an utterly amazing game. That being said I could imagine the game being just as fun in 2D, though it would loose its artistic value, and would thus be slightly less appealing. Then comes the sequel with jacked graphics and features, but a loss of that nostalgic feeling that the old one had. Not long after I started pondering why, I came with a very quick conclusion. Although I was playing a 3D rts, the controls and interface had turned it into more of a 2D game. There wasn't the feeling of depth, or the sense of no defined "up direction". The formations had even been taken out, further reducing 3D strategy. I realized that if the sequel had come out before, I wouldn't be such a Homeworld fan. In the end, 2D/3D just changes the art and availability of improvements, but you have to know what you're doing. An example of a 2D game that would appear to have a tough transition from 2D to 3D is MMM (momentum missile mayhem). It would be very tough to imagine a 3D system that would have the predicted chain reaction of chaos that you get from a well placed shot, which is essentially the essence of the game. In the transition I thought of 2 options would make and break the sequel. 1: You give the player an fps view of the game which would hinder you ability to see the incoming vehicles for better chain reactions and thus turning the game into an utter failure. 2: You make the strip that the vehicles trek into a spore-esque globe that can allow you add an amazing array of new features. But it would not be able to stop there, as some features would be critical. The game must allow you to see more than one part of the globe at the same time, otherwise stray vehicles could get past your line of sight. Then you would have to add features to get those stray vehicles to concentrate on the action. Then you can add all the cool features and cool artwork, such as projectiles that bounce up high for added crushing affect etc. If the game does not have the correct improvements, the transition will obviously fail, but if it's someone who knows what they're doing, the transition is usually an improvement in art and features that can be made available.
This question actually got me thinking: shouldn't we try cloning the geniuses of the past like Einstein and Newton? THAT would be an unquestionably good idea that can really settle the nature/nurture debate. Of course I'm no expert in the field so I don't know if that would be as feasible. Can some expert out there mention why this isn't being (to my knowledge) attempted?
You can try neurofeedback which is a direct way to train the brain. Research this since there is a lot information out there, both for the expert and layman.
Does anyone know if this might someday lead to antimatter plants? From a special on discovery, I heard that antimatter has a 100% mass to energy conversion, and uranium/plutonium is very expensive to enrich, so using gold for energy wouldn't be too impractical. This would be very exciting research if it does mean cheap energy at that scale with no pollution.
Your comment is nearly spot-on. Creativity comes from obsession. Albert Einstein was quoted attributing his success to his passion rather than his natural talent. And there is no question as to whether Isac Newton was obsessed with his work. No one got their work done in a day, in fact, even though you can learn some of their accomplishments in less than a week (sometimes faster), it took them years to create and perfect. Although there is always a defining moment that they realize something, there is always some gradual progress that it takes to get there. Also, TFA mentions brain training and hints at neuroplasticity, but it has no mention of neurofeedback. The brain is similar to a muscle in that it can be improved, but only with the proper use. Neurofeedback doesn't have to be used for treatment, it can also be used to improve the mind and even to induce a hypnogogic state, which is shown to dramatically increase creativity. Just use wikipedia to read more into the subject, as the links I could post here wouldn't fit.
For one, there would be too many advisers to bribe considering that it would be many organizations for each discipline, and then there would be many parties for the debates that each discipline has, and then there would be the plethora of people who would be certified advisers, as it could be a simple thing to obtain (simply getting a degree and then license for the discipline should be good enough). Then each party of each discipline can choose someone who is prominent in the field to be a representative to present the plan that the massive amount of advisers from each party agree on. Second, the system would be fast as hell in comparison to the slow process we have now of the so called checks and balances. Third, the market would be regulated better if it was the majority of the people voting on issues to regulate the market, so that it will be impossible to have some lobbyist whore allow any monopoly to run rampant and further corrupt the government.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually the results of studies linking video games and aggression have been posted on Slashdot (you can find a lot of studies wit Google). Also I'm not biased, I clearly said it pointed both ways and I obviously mentioned that there is a chance that a child that is too young will imitate what is seen on any media. Also, I speak from personal experience (both with knowledge of psychology/statistics and my own observations). One thing I have noticed is that the "aggression" in video games is caused by loosing. When football fans show violence, it's not because violent media has a direct play in it, it's because the ref made a bad call, or some player made a dumb move.
Following the little warning, it should read, Warning: this link has been established with biased experiments and insufficient data, as well as lack of scientific analysis. Experiments have pointed both ways (yet we have cherry picked this one) and to this day, many dolts firmly believe that correlation implies causation. You can however have faith in the fact that if your children are young enough, they may be as stupid as the chain of idiots who have wasted your tax money on this crap. This entails that, like lemmings, without proper guidance/responsibility, they will most likely attempt (and fail) to pick up a hooker and shoot her in the face to avoid paying the fees, following an uninterrupted session of GTA. If they get closer to success than desired, no matter how hilarious it may be, it is YOUR responsibility, not the source of this media.
You mean some scientist out there almost got laid!? This IS one for the headlines! I just hope we'll be able to replicate the results with ease. God knows how many infeasible experiments big organizations have dangled in front of my low budget lab.
I'll just show up with my steel-clad genes and live an extremely unhealthy life style, then use my health insurance funds to undo the damage. Take THAT "the system"!
Does it still involve me taking my pants off and hearing the words "trust me I'm a doctor"?
For the record, I think that "terrorists" have seriously considered the airplane suicide bombing to be so 2001. If they were seriously thinking about killing masses of people they would go with the new trend of remote detonated car bombs. It's been "in" since the Iraq war, and there is NO security measures implemented against it (sound familiar?).
No one will need more than 637 kb of random number generation for a personal computer.
read my sig
in other news, a shiny new Lamborghini stand out in a school parking lot. Seriously how is it news that something expensive (i.e. typically rare) stimulates the brain more. Anything that's rare, out of place, or new typically grabs more of our attention. It's a natural response from our neocortex.
I honestly believe that the CS teaching will start out bad. There are few teachers who can tell a computer from a hole in the ground, and fewer that can program to a good degree. However, the initiative for teachers to know about computers must start here. I had a teacher who taught AP computer programming with literally no knowledge about programming. He made countless errors and would have to teach himself in the middle of class. But you know what? The interested students actually learned decent programming, all the way up to mid level object oriented programming. What is so funny is that his lack of knowledge was even a benefit. He didn't know that Java was part of the curriculum because he didn't know there was such a thing as more then one programming language. He just picked up a c++ book and taught us that. After we finished learning about objects and their parameters, he decided to do interfaces with a library he downloaded and found out about VB. Since then, he suddenly realized there were a myriad of languages out there. By the end of the year we all learned c++, VB, Java (he finally found out), and he gave us a choice of the other programming languages to learn (I learned AUTOIT and my friend learned python). And he went from not knowing about the alt+tab trick, to writing a autoit script that would lock the computer down and beep like mad when the keyword "game" was typed. This may be the best case scenario, but as long as there is are a sliver of ambitious people distributed throughout the system, there will be a massive amount of progress made with this choice.
incidentally, the car can be used to pick up very tiny prostitutes.
The other solution is to use asshole seeking missiles on the botnets. Of course it would probably end up leading astray from the pricks with the checklist that always responds to peoples' solutions to spam.
I ask them when they started stealing shit on the high seas.
well since we're getting technical, would you like to explain a pirates affinity to rob others of their feces?
You can teach them a scripting language like autoit (http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/downloads.shtml). The reason for teaching them this language is very simple: it's easy to do a lot of things with very little code. Since they're young, you'll find that even the interested and capable students get bored. If you want your computer to beep, tell it how load in the parameters, if you want the mouse to move, just say where (and how fast) in the arguments, and if you need a gui, just say how big and where etc. You can also do advanced things such as networking with ease. I remember the woes of text-only learning. I would have killed to get an assignment where I can truly play with the computer. However if you want the kids to learn a powerful language right off the bat, one that requires skill to master well, there is no better alternative than c++. It's slightly better than c (not performance wise of course) since object oriented programming is very important. I don't really need to justify c++ however, since you can find articles praising it anywhere you look. If you really want to make it fun, just look around for libraries that they can play with. I have to say, you never really feel computer savvy until you go beyond text programming.
Yes because if drugs weren't made illegal, any poor bastard could go to nearly any city and get them. Oops that's already the case. If our feeble attempts to stop drugs was a war, we'd already loose, because you will never win until you stop nearly all drugs from being sold, which will NEVER happen. We should at least make them legal in some shithole state like Arkansas so that all the junkies move there.
That would mean they only loose 99 cents a pop. Since they're assholes, I was thinking of selling them one dollar asswhooping insurance, then beating the crap out of them and raising my rates.
Nope, his brain was most likely removed without permission: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein's_brain
Anyways cloning humans isn't against human rights or unethical. Would you debate your existence if someone told you that you were cloned? What if humanity lost its ability to naturally procreate? Would it suddenly change to not being against God's will? Humans play God every day when we take or prolong life, and I say if it's for the better of humanity, I'm sure God would be cool with it.
I know many people don't like their rts in 3D, but Homeworld is an utterly amazing game. That being said I could imagine the game being just as fun in 2D, though it would loose its artistic value, and would thus be slightly less appealing. Then comes the sequel with jacked graphics and features, but a loss of that nostalgic feeling that the old one had. Not long after I started pondering why, I came with a very quick conclusion. Although I was playing a 3D rts, the controls and interface had turned it into more of a 2D game. There wasn't the feeling of depth, or the sense of no defined "up direction". The formations had even been taken out, further reducing 3D strategy. I realized that if the sequel had come out before, I wouldn't be such a Homeworld fan. In the end, 2D/3D just changes the art and availability of improvements, but you have to know what you're doing. An example of a 2D game that would appear to have a tough transition from 2D to 3D is MMM (momentum missile mayhem). It would be very tough to imagine a 3D system that would have the predicted chain reaction of chaos that you get from a well placed shot, which is essentially the essence of the game. In the transition I thought of 2 options would make and break the sequel. 1: You give the player an fps view of the game which would hinder you ability to see the incoming vehicles for better chain reactions and thus turning the game into an utter failure. 2: You make the strip that the vehicles trek into a spore-esque globe that can allow you add an amazing array of new features. But it would not be able to stop there, as some features would be critical. The game must allow you to see more than one part of the globe at the same time, otherwise stray vehicles could get past your line of sight. Then you would have to add features to get those stray vehicles to concentrate on the action. Then you can add all the cool features and cool artwork, such as projectiles that bounce up high for added crushing affect etc. If the game does not have the correct improvements, the transition will obviously fail, but if it's someone who knows what they're doing, the transition is usually an improvement in art and features that can be made available.
This question actually got me thinking: shouldn't we try cloning the geniuses of the past like Einstein and Newton? THAT would be an unquestionably good idea that can really settle the nature/nurture debate. Of course I'm no expert in the field so I don't know if that would be as feasible. Can some expert out there mention why this isn't being (to my knowledge) attempted?
I know that many people out there know about maddox, but I'd love to share his classic articles on PETA with anyone who hasn't. Links:
http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi#PETA
and http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill
You can try neurofeedback which is a direct way to train the brain. Research this since there is a lot information out there, both for the expert and layman.
The positive identification was made by comparing the DNA from a skeleton's teeth with that from hairs in a book known to have belonged to Copernicus
All this proves is that he bit Copernicus. Get back to work.
-The Management
(just_kidding)
Does anyone know if this might someday lead to antimatter plants? From a special on discovery, I heard that antimatter has a 100% mass to energy conversion, and uranium/plutonium is very expensive to enrich, so using gold for energy wouldn't be too impractical. This would be very exciting research if it does mean cheap energy at that scale with no pollution.
Your comment is nearly spot-on. Creativity comes from obsession. Albert Einstein was quoted attributing his success to his passion rather than his natural talent. And there is no question as to whether Isac Newton was obsessed with his work. No one got their work done in a day, in fact, even though you can learn some of their accomplishments in less than a week (sometimes faster), it took them years to create and perfect. Although there is always a defining moment that they realize something, there is always some gradual progress that it takes to get there. Also, TFA mentions brain training and hints at neuroplasticity, but it has no mention of neurofeedback. The brain is similar to a muscle in that it can be improved, but only with the proper use. Neurofeedback doesn't have to be used for treatment, it can also be used to improve the mind and even to induce a hypnogogic state, which is shown to dramatically increase creativity. Just use wikipedia to read more into the subject, as the links I could post here wouldn't fit.
For one, there would be too many advisers to bribe considering that it would be many organizations for each discipline, and then there would be many parties for the debates that each discipline has, and then there would be the plethora of people who would be certified advisers, as it could be a simple thing to obtain (simply getting a degree and then license for the discipline should be good enough). Then each party of each discipline can choose someone who is prominent in the field to be a representative to present the plan that the massive amount of advisers from each party agree on. Second, the system would be fast as hell in comparison to the slow process we have now of the so called checks and balances. Third, the market would be regulated better if it was the majority of the people voting on issues to regulate the market, so that it will be impossible to have some lobbyist whore allow any monopoly to run rampant and further corrupt the government.