Trying to figure out where to stop or keep going in the first place (when there's a lower or higher expected value for the next ticket) is a problem, and so is a lack of fine-grained control over when to stop or keep going. Having to buy the tickets off the stack in sequence helps lead to the latter problem. However, buying my tickets one-by-one helps. (I bring a large stack of $1s with me to the Lotto retailer to help enable this logistically.)
I too have figured that the scratchoffs aren't truly random independent trials because they have to be machine-printed en masse, and for regulation and/or business reasons, it may make sense to ensure that the prizes aren't clumped.
The whole idea is to find ways to increase your odds; some games and play options may give you better odds to begin with in addition to whatever advantage gained through your stratagem. Check your local listings.:)
People who are bad at math play the lottery badly, people who are good at math avoid the lottery, and people who are really good at math figure out how to play the lottery intelligently.:)
Yes; even if you recognize the basic validity of evolution, you might worry about your ability to actually explain it effectively.
That being said, the mechanisms of evolution class in my senior year of HS was eye-opening. That teacher did get it.
That teacher did purposely stay away from the politics, focusing on demonstrating various evolutionary mechanisms. However, four years later and off the top of my head, I don't remember all the details, yet I do remember a "bird-beak" activity with binder clips and a lot of discussion of clade diagrams.
A good teacher trying to teach something they don't know is indeed a problem, but a subject-matter-expert who isn't the best teacher has its own issues. Yes, I know degrees don't tell the whole story, but still...
Ah, soft power. I'll agree with the +5 Insightful here. One of my favorite Slashdot posts in awhile. I [i]had[/i] previously heard of a desire for Western consumer goods as a nail in the coffin of Soviet-style communism.
I too have wondered about the power pop culture has. As someone who thinks positively of its better components (it’s easy evne if you don’t have an agenda to attack something via its worst prominent aspects), this was a very uplifting read.
I have wondered why social conservatives of various stripes, domestic or foreign, are so afraid of it. I do notice that they seem to mask their real concerns when railing against it (and what bare their real concerns?)
Most everyone recognizes that the children are the future, and it’s a future they all want to shape. Some of them seem to be trying to talk us in to tying ourselves down, and less and less of us are buying that. I’ve intermittently fallen into that trap myself.
I'd add the following example, which has been my focal point for considering the issue: various pop stars displaying a highly positive attitude towards the gays.
P.S. Brilliant job delineating between American ideals and the reality of some of our behavior.
"There is no honest reason to believe that Sarah Palin is stupid." My assessment of the facts is different; her public misstatements always came off as being more serious than the mere verbal gaffes of the Bushism (that last phrase is a key part of the type of "'I hate dubya, but he's not dumb' speech" to which clyxemaxwell refers.
I would still would not agree with a male version's political opinions; I might only admit to gender politics as a small factor. Yet conversely, for fear of sexism, you overcompensate in her favor?
Or are we both fumbling for reasons "after the fact"
Smart and attractive is quite possible, no doubt about it. However, stupid and attractive is altogether too common, so that leaves people on-edge. Admittedly, in general I sometimes overcompensate when dealing with attractive professional women for fear of merely "thinking with my dick".
Aren't political wonks just as much nerds as the gadget/internet enthusiasts? Nerds come in many stripes.
I'd say so; geekyness or whatever you call it can be partially defined by an obsessive enthusiasm that can manifest itself across many topics. I find myself to be a geek about most of the things I do; does the attitude flow over into other geeks' nontechnical interests as well?
You've got to smart to thrive playing those kinds of political games, I just think her policies lead to stupid places; also, riling up the common populace can prove dangerous.
link shows Daniel Keys Moran, I thought you meant Dropkick Murphys for a minute. Proud working-class punks there to be sure, but no specifically anti-police song of theirs comes to mind.
"The Pirate Bay only removes torrents if the name isn't in accordance with the content. One must know what is being downloaded. (accordance with the content also means any torrents which description is made to match a certain search phrase that is not relevant will also be deleted)"
http://thepiratebay.org/policy also tries to preclude commercial interference with TPB; the about page obliquely refers to an anti-kiddie porn attitude.
(All of this in addition to explaining the technical nature of BitTorrent)
Even if true: Simply the enemy of my enemy is my friend, from both sides' perspective there? Also, I can see why they'd want to deal with experts in their "industry".
Sometimes it comes off this way, sometimes it doesn't.
I've wondered whether activism for a "disadvantaged minority" is really activism against an "advantaged majority", and if some problems stem from merely assuming they're an "advantaged majority" to begin with.
Conversely, I've wondered if it could actually good for everybody, especially but not only the "disadvantaged minority", when done right.
Assuming that the prospective astronauts are indeed heterosexual: Would sending along an approximately equal mix of males and females create more problems than it solves, though?
I tended to see WWI as a stalemate that the Americans helped the Allies tip the balance of; it may have ground down in the Germans' favor in an alternate timeline. I can also see a isolationist US continuing to be that way sans a Pearl Harbor; WWII in Europe would depend on whether Britain can hold out like they did in reality, who breaks Molotov-Ribbentrop and how, and whether & how Japan actually wants to tangle with the USSR or vice versa.
genetics, evolution, demographics It seems ironic that the peoples doing best at this often aren't science-y types. It is a concern, to lose by force of numbers
criticized in the West for being too pro-Islam, and very harshly criticized in the Islamic world for being too anti-Islam.
When both sides think you're biased against them, that seems to be a fairly good sign that you're indeed balanced.:)
As for Western media, I get a similar impression of the BBC.
Re:Such "codes" fail in a world of easy distributi
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
De facto banning stuff that fails to meet the code is of course anti-free-market: what I meant was code-passed and code-failed material circulating in parallel; some might value the options and the identification marker.
from the CCA article on Wikpedia...
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
"Periodic revisions were made to the Code to reflect changing attitudes about appropriate subject matter (e.g., the ban on referring to homosexuality was revised in 1989 to allow non-stereotypical depictions of gay men and lesbians)"
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, would the homeless guys be able to implement the MIT geek's system?
Trying to figure out where to stop or keep going in the first place (when there's a lower or higher expected value for the next ticket) is a problem, and so is a lack of fine-grained control over when to stop or keep going. Having to buy the tickets off the stack in sequence helps lead to the latter problem. However, buying my tickets one-by-one helps. (I bring a large stack of $1s with me to the Lotto retailer to help enable this logistically.)
I too have figured that the scratchoffs aren't truly random independent trials because they have to be machine-printed en masse, and for regulation and/or business reasons, it may make sense to ensure that the prizes aren't clumped.
The whole idea is to find ways to increase your odds; some games and play options may give you better odds to begin with in addition to whatever advantage gained through your stratagem. Check your local listings. :)
People who are bad at math play the lottery badly, people who are good at math avoid the lottery, and people who are really good at math figure out how to play the lottery intelligently. :)
Yes; even if you recognize the basic validity of evolution, you might worry about your ability to actually explain it effectively.
That being said, the mechanisms of evolution class in my senior year of HS was eye-opening. That teacher did get it.
That teacher did purposely stay away from the politics, focusing on demonstrating various evolutionary mechanisms. However, four years later and off the top of my head, I don't remember all the details, yet I do remember a "bird-beak" activity with binder clips and a lot of discussion of clade diagrams.
A good teacher trying to teach something they don't know is indeed a problem, but a subject-matter-expert who isn't the best teacher has its own issues.
Yes, I know degrees don't tell the whole story, but still...
Ah, soft power.
I'll agree with the +5 Insightful here. One of my favorite Slashdot posts in awhile.
I [i]had[/i] previously heard of a desire for Western consumer goods as a nail in the coffin of Soviet-style communism.
I too have wondered about the power pop culture has. As someone who thinks positively of its better components (it’s easy evne if you don’t have an agenda to attack something via its worst prominent aspects), this was a very uplifting read.
I have wondered why social conservatives of various stripes, domestic or foreign, are so afraid of it. I do notice that they seem to mask their real concerns when railing against it (and what bare their real concerns?)
Most everyone recognizes that the children are the future, and it’s a future they all want to shape. Some of them seem to be trying to talk us in to tying ourselves down, and less and less of us are buying that. I’ve intermittently fallen into that trap myself.
I'd add the following example, which has been my focal point for considering the issue: various pop stars displaying a highly positive attitude towards the gays.
P.S.
Brilliant job delineating between American ideals and the reality of some of our behavior.
"There is no honest reason to believe that Sarah Palin is stupid."
My assessment of the facts is different; her public misstatements always came off as being more serious than the mere verbal gaffes of the Bushism (that last phrase is a key part of the type of "'I hate dubya, but he's not dumb' speech" to which clyxemaxwell refers.
I would still would not agree with a male version's political opinions; I might only admit to gender politics as a small factor.
Yet conversely, for fear of sexism, you overcompensate in her favor?
Or are we both fumbling for reasons "after the fact"
Smart and attractive is quite possible, no doubt about it. However, stupid and attractive is altogether too common, so that leaves people on-edge.
Admittedly, in general I sometimes overcompensate when dealing with attractive professional women for fear of merely "thinking with my dick".
Aren't political wonks just as much nerds as the gadget/internet enthusiasts? Nerds come in many stripes.
I'd say so; geekyness or whatever you call it can be partially defined by an obsessive enthusiasm that can manifest itself across many topics.
I find myself to be a geek about most of the things I do; does the attitude flow over into other geeks' nontechnical interests as well?
You've got to smart to thrive playing those kinds of political games, I just think her policies lead to stupid places; also, riling up the common populace can prove dangerous.
link shows Daniel Keys Moran, I thought you meant Dropkick Murphys for a minute.
Proud working-class punks there to be sure, but no specifically anti-police song of theirs comes to mind.
I'd be just as pissed with a male of similar conservative nutcase-ness. :P
What sibling AC post said: "The problem is she's a dangerous lunatic. She doesn't know squat, doesn't care and is PROUD of it."
Fakes have never been my problem with TPB - rare stuff that doesn't get seeded all the way is a far more common and thus far more frustrating problem.
Once I unknowingly uploaded a file that was corrupted, the comments pointed this out, and I then actually bothered to fix, reupload and reseed.
As with many other computer-tech issues, it's a PEBKAC problem. :)
Apparently, fakes are one of the very few things against TPB policy.
From http://thepiratebay.org/about :
"The Pirate Bay only removes torrents if the name isn't in accordance with the content. One must know what is being downloaded. (accordance with the content also means any torrents which description is made to match a certain search phrase that is not relevant will also be deleted)"
http://thepiratebay.org/policy also tries to preclude commercial interference with TPB; the about page obliquely refers to an anti-kiddie porn attitude.
(All of this in addition to explaining the technical nature of BitTorrent)
OKC has been used as a discussion point elsewhere in this thread:
McVeigh did get executed, but Terry Nichols *is* in Supermax for life.
Even if true:
Simply the enemy of my enemy is my friend, from both sides' perspective there?
Also, I can see why they'd want to deal with experts in their "industry".
Sometimes it comes off this way, sometimes it doesn't.
I've wondered whether activism for a "disadvantaged minority" is really activism against an "advantaged majority", and if some problems stem from merely assuming they're an "advantaged majority" to begin with.
Conversely, I've wondered if it could actually good for everybody, especially but not only the "disadvantaged minority", when done right.
(Heterosexual Caucasian male here, BTW...)
Assuming that the prospective astronauts are indeed heterosexual: Would sending along an approximately equal mix of males and females create more problems than it solves, though?
I find "bigot" be an appropriately general term for such incidences, to pre-empt nit-picking based on the technical meaning of "race".
I tended to see WWI as a stalemate that the Americans helped the Allies tip the balance of; it may have ground down in the Germans' favor in an alternate timeline.
I can also see a isolationist US continuing to be that way sans a Pearl Harbor; WWII in Europe would depend on whether Britain can hold out like they did in reality, who breaks Molotov-Ribbentrop and how, and whether & how Japan actually wants to tangle with the USSR or vice versa.
Yeah yeah, too many variables.
genetics, evolution, demographics
It seems ironic that the peoples doing best at this often aren't science-y types.
It is a concern, to lose by force of numbers
criticized in the West for being too pro-Islam, and very harshly criticized in the Islamic world for being too anti-Islam.
When both sides think you're biased against them, that seems to be a fairly good sign that you're indeed balanced. :)
As for Western media, I get a similar impression of the BBC.
De facto banning stuff that fails to meet the code is of course anti-free-market: what I meant was code-passed and code-failed material circulating in parallel; some might value the options and the identification marker.
"Periodic revisions were made to the Code to reflect changing attitudes about appropriate subject matter (e.g., the ban on referring to homosexuality was revised in 1989 to allow non-stereotypical depictions of gay men and lesbians)"