You can call me a moron if you take what I'm saying very simply and draw a lot of ridiculous assumptions about what I meant in that sentence. In brief, my planning involves looking at what is possible now, what is plausible in the immediate future (where most people focus on solving problems, but are competing with other smart people), and then what would be plausible if several currently plausible things come about. That next step out is what I'm betting on, but I hedge my bets broadly and intelligently and I constantly monitor the sciences that are important for my planning. So, in short, you don't know me.
Hacks are so sophisticated that (this is for nearly a decade now) you can pay a monthly fee and a business will guarantee you their hacks will not get you caught. This means that if you are caught, they will buy you a fresh copy of the game. The hacks come by way of a client software that gets the latest undetectable hacks direct from the company and implements them as your game begins. These can include aimbots, wallhacks, etc. Interestingly, the aimbots are engineered to be less detectable, having some deliberate slop and acquisition time in them so that when a player's game is reviewed, it may appear more natural instead of a quick 'snap' to a headshot.
I know this because I played in competitive BF2 and was a huge proponent of detecting and outing the hackers in the top competitive community. Several of my colleagues were anti-hack people who were assigned to infiltrate those very hack selling companies as clients. Guess what? Those companies have forums where hackers assemble to get together full teams for (I'm sure you've got the picture by now) the top leagues and competitive games.
I'm so glad I don't game competitively for many reasons. I loved it at the time, but the paranoia and concern over hackers was such a big deal. Also, be wary of gamers from quebec. Of the competitive gamers caught in BF2 for hacking there were as many from Quebec as there was from the western hemisphere as a whole. There was a huge culture of disrespect coming out of quebec at the time.
Have you been watching the materials science field? Superoconductors are approaching STP. If you took any computer you have in your hands right now and rewired it with superconductor, you could probably just keep cranking up the overclocking rate with zero consequence. Without resistance there is no heat, and without heat, there is no problem. This is happening very soon. Read up.
I find this laughable because it's almost the opposite of the "If we can put a man on the moon, we can solve cancer." fallacy. If we can't copy an amoeba, we won't. LOL. No? I beg to differ. We can't right now, and for a million fundamental reasons that are all being solved in time.
Here's some perspective. I work in cell biology. 3 years ago, genetic expression required measuring the RNAs of at least a small cluster of cells. Two years ago, single cell RNA analysis became available. A year ago we started seeing the ability to split one cell into 4 equal vessicles, each able to be analyzed separately if need be. We also now have the software and processing power to infer huge bioinformatic hypotheses from this intricate data. In three years the ability went from an average, to a single, to a greater sampling number from the single (for statistical accuracy). THIS IS NOT EVEN THE UPCURVE OF SINGULARITY, but it sure feels like it.
Nanomaterials are allowing for crazy new properties on the macro-scale. Biotechnology is becoming cellular an surpassing simple chemistry. Artificial intelligence is now being implemented on neural-like computer architectures which are much more powerful at brain-like activity.
Full Disclosure, I've been a Kurzweilian Singularity Believer for years now and my life is betting on it. But I've had a lot more than confirmation bias going on to keep my confidence very high.
Artificial Intelligence doesn't work like this. Instead, AI will test a number of outputs and then adjust its attempts at getting a 'right' answer as the process begins to resonate on being right more frequently. And so when faced with a question about killing humans, it boils down to finding out if killing humans is one of the most likely responses to achieve the desired outcome. That desired outcome can be quite abstract, too. It doesn't have to be something like "There's a bad guy in front of you with an EMP! What do you do?" It could be far more abstract in the sense of ecosystem sustainability, manufacturing changes, etc.
Isn't it strange how a PUBLIC COMPANY is acting like it's a private business? Who cares if they lose money? It's a public entity! Why aren't they innovating ways to roll out solar on behalf of the public corporation!
Yes. PGE has jobs to protect. But there isn't a single business out there that can be stagnant. Everyone is in a system of productivity and change. Public utilities included.
I just don't think you'll find many in the younger crowd of coders to be humble enough to think that 1) their code could be buggy, or 2) that something/someone else could fix it. The only people I run into that talk about hard and true reliable coding as a standard are over 45 years old. All the young bucks think its impossible. Let's cue up the replies and downvotes (such as calling me a troll when i'm expressing a strong generalized observation) from here on slashdot to confirm my claims.
...especially since their former product's business tried a low blow lawsuit on their newly acquired product line... This is a most likely outcome, and surprisingly newsworthy (since I think this is a pointless discussion).
We also have local animals to screen in case they became a reservoir.....
But oh... no.. lets keep letting people in and out of these plagued countries/areas with ease and only a quick one-time health check....... THIS IS THE TIME TO MAKE PEOPLE WAIT 2-3 WEEKS IN QUARANTINE IF THEY DECIDE TO GO TO SHITTY-PLACE-ON-EARTH RIGHT NOW.RIGHT? I would have hoped they did this over a month ago, and now, to be frank, they should be dropping the 3-week quarantine on Dallas.
How many predictions will the CDC be wrong about before they stop chasing it with "Don't worry"?
Screener: Did you use needles during your visit? Did you engage in intercourse with anyone during your visit? Did you eat any bushmeat during your visit?
(Subject thinking about how a yes to question will seriously inconvenience him and his plans --- and then making the awful assumption everyone does which is to think he's special and probably is not a problem).
Subject: Uhh.. nope. I just bought some postcards and took some pictures. That's all.
Dallas needs to be on lockdown for 21 days. The guy had symptoms for two days before he checked in...
My biggest fear about this is that the CDC has been wrong about their predictions all the way, and now they are CONFIDENT that this new 'blase' reaction to this guy is going to be enough and that we should (as they said in everything else that was wrong) 'not worry'. NOT WORRY? How about the people at the CDC show me that THEY are worried and working really goddamned hard to quarantine this plague -- that way I don't have to worry.
It's as if they're imagining the most positive outcomes and betting on it. PEOPLE'S FECAL MATTER GETS ON EVERYTHING! It's because we're animals! It's because we don't really wash our hands for 1 minute of scrubbing. Can we just get a grip on this and make everyone going to infected areas wait 2-3 weeks before they can travel? Is a little discomfort worth avoiding to put everyone at risk?
I'd love to see the CDC spokespeople bet their lives on their predictions. Why? If they doubt to bet their life, they will be forced to think about why they won't bet it. With every false confidence they project, they put us at risk.
They are what I term, Tupac-Christians. It's where you wear a gold chain and cross and you talk about 'god' and such, but you've only got a few toes in the pool of faith and you spend 99% of your time contradicting the faith. From my experience, most people that call themselves Christians fit this model, and most people that I would think are adhering closely to Jesus/Bible, would say that those other people are not real Christians.
Where will we get the endless stream of videos of people hurting themselves doing foolish things? That's a pretty big share of the internet right there!
Way to miss the point. If you have the mindset of losing, you will lose. If you think your work is not marketable, you won't.
Do you know that fundamental science requires tools? Did you know that the best labs that find out amazing basic science findings get there by innovating amazing new tools? DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE REFEFRENCE TO JC VENTER? The human genome sequence is, in itself, hard to market and sell. The sequence was first found by one man, JC Venter. He beat a huge army of publicly funded labs. While those labs used existing technologies to each try to sequence parts of the genome and get together to glue sequences together, Venter innovated highly improved DNA sequencing technlology. And thus he sequenced the human genome first. Guess what followed? All of those labs, and more, bought his sequencing technology and the models to follow.
If you can't find something to sell then you're destined to beg for money. I'd love to see a world without money that allocates resource based on meritocracy... But that's not reality.
You may think I need to grow up, but I can guarantee you that you need to wake up and smell the coffee of capitalism and try to identify how to get what you want. If you're in the US and you will always beg for money, try your hardest to Elect Elizabeth Warren as president because she wants to double NIH funding.
If you choose to read it in an insulting way, it is insulting. Or you can understand the gist of it which is to say 'pull yourself up from your perceived limitations and do what is necessary to rise to a superior position in life." But.... You know.... You're interested in arguing about communication, and not staying on topic; The next generation of wasted life. I can guarantee you that you'll grow a lot more in life by staying focused. Then again, if you're here to learn about communication and not about the subject, this is right up your alley.
Right. But with good design, the water can be stored efficiently without evaporation, and the top of the container could possibly be engineered to collect/filter rainwater as well as an added benefit. I'm not trying to give you the best solution -- its just a simple idea I have always considered; loading electrical energy into physical potential energy by way of working against gravity. Maybe, instead, just run a big heavy chunk of metal up a notched pole? Then release it to spin a worm gear, to a large cog, then big generator as it slowly drops?
If I had resources, time, and money, I'd love to live out in a cabin somewhere and toy around with simplified energy storage solutions.
You should consider a pump that pushes water up and then a pelton wheel for the release of pressure on the way down. It's not the most efficient but it's smart.
I am super excited. The graphene capacitors from UCLA (about 18 months ago) can now be scaled up. They hired some company to try to scale up their tech, but maybe this finding can help. The implications for this is that new technologies are going to arrive in your hands and homes. Enjoy.
Also, I am an engineer of sorts (cell biology). I use Celsius and meters every day. My understanding of a variety of units of measure only helped to understand the original point the OP was making, which was to say "awkward unit system you use". If you can get over that hangup, you might actually be part of the real conversation.
Remember --- if you can't tie your shoes, you'll never make it to work today.
The topic is not units of measure. The topic is about the teaching of the scientific process. You're getting hung up on insignificant side topics that aren't going to contribute to the topic.
Slashdot Mirror
You can call me a moron if you take what I'm saying very simply and draw a lot of ridiculous assumptions about what I meant in that sentence. In brief, my planning involves looking at what is possible now, what is plausible in the immediate future (where most people focus on solving problems, but are competing with other smart people), and then what would be plausible if several currently plausible things come about. That next step out is what I'm betting on, but I hedge my bets broadly and intelligently and I constantly monitor the sciences that are important for my planning. So, in short, you don't know me.
Ok. And apply energetic conservation from zero resistance to your laws. Do you know about superconductors?
Hacks are so sophisticated that (this is for nearly a decade now) you can pay a monthly fee and a business will guarantee you their hacks will not get you caught. This means that if you are caught, they will buy you a fresh copy of the game. The hacks come by way of a client software that gets the latest undetectable hacks direct from the company and implements them as your game begins. These can include aimbots, wallhacks, etc. Interestingly, the aimbots are engineered to be less detectable, having some deliberate slop and acquisition time in them so that when a player's game is reviewed, it may appear more natural instead of a quick 'snap' to a headshot.
I know this because I played in competitive BF2 and was a huge proponent of detecting and outing the hackers in the top competitive community. Several of my colleagues were anti-hack people who were assigned to infiltrate those very hack selling companies as clients. Guess what? Those companies have forums where hackers assemble to get together full teams for (I'm sure you've got the picture by now) the top leagues and competitive games.
I'm so glad I don't game competitively for many reasons. I loved it at the time, but the paranoia and concern over hackers was such a big deal. Also, be wary of gamers from quebec. Of the competitive gamers caught in BF2 for hacking there were as many from Quebec as there was from the western hemisphere as a whole. There was a huge culture of disrespect coming out of quebec at the time.
You rock. I haven't seen this yet.
Have you been watching the materials science field? Superoconductors are approaching STP. If you took any computer you have in your hands right now and rewired it with superconductor, you could probably just keep cranking up the overclocking rate with zero consequence. Without resistance there is no heat, and without heat, there is no problem. This is happening very soon. Read up.
I find this laughable because it's almost the opposite of the "If we can put a man on the moon, we can solve cancer." fallacy. If we can't copy an amoeba, we won't. LOL. No? I beg to differ. We can't right now, and for a million fundamental reasons that are all being solved in time.
Here's some perspective. I work in cell biology. 3 years ago, genetic expression required measuring the RNAs of at least a small cluster of cells. Two years ago, single cell RNA analysis became available. A year ago we started seeing the ability to split one cell into 4 equal vessicles, each able to be analyzed separately if need be. We also now have the software and processing power to infer huge bioinformatic hypotheses from this intricate data. In three years the ability went from an average, to a single, to a greater sampling number from the single (for statistical accuracy). THIS IS NOT EVEN THE UPCURVE OF SINGULARITY, but it sure feels like it.
Nanomaterials are allowing for crazy new properties on the macro-scale. Biotechnology is becoming cellular an surpassing simple chemistry. Artificial intelligence is now being implemented on neural-like computer architectures which are much more powerful at brain-like activity.
Full Disclosure, I've been a Kurzweilian Singularity Believer for years now and my life is betting on it. But I've had a lot more than confirmation bias going on to keep my confidence very high.
Artificial Intelligence doesn't work like this. Instead, AI will test a number of outputs and then adjust its attempts at getting a 'right' answer as the process begins to resonate on being right more frequently. And so when faced with a question about killing humans, it boils down to finding out if killing humans is one of the most likely responses to achieve the desired outcome. That desired outcome can be quite abstract, too. It doesn't have to be something like "There's a bad guy in front of you with an EMP! What do you do?" It could be far more abstract in the sense of ecosystem sustainability, manufacturing changes, etc.
AI has come a very long way.
Isn't it strange how a PUBLIC COMPANY is acting like it's a private business? Who cares if they lose money? It's a public entity! Why aren't they innovating ways to roll out solar on behalf of the public corporation!
Yes. PGE has jobs to protect. But there isn't a single business out there that can be stagnant. Everyone is in a system of productivity and change. Public utilities included.
I just don't think you'll find many in the younger crowd of coders to be humble enough to think that 1) their code could be buggy, or 2) that something/someone else could fix it. The only people I run into that talk about hard and true reliable coding as a standard are over 45 years old. All the young bucks think its impossible. Let's cue up the replies and downvotes (such as calling me a troll when i'm expressing a strong generalized observation) from here on slashdot to confirm my claims.
...especially since their former product's business tried a low blow lawsuit on their newly acquired product line... This is a most likely outcome, and surprisingly newsworthy (since I think this is a pointless discussion).
Can't you walk over to where this equipment is and then post?
We also have local animals to screen in case they became a reservoir.....
But oh... no.. lets keep letting people in and out of these plagued countries/areas with ease and only a quick one-time health check... .... THIS IS THE TIME TO MAKE PEOPLE WAIT 2-3 WEEKS IN QUARANTINE IF THEY DECIDE TO GO TO SHITTY-PLACE-ON-EARTH RIGHT NOW.RIGHT? I would have hoped they did this over a month ago, and now, to be frank, they should be dropping the 3-week quarantine on Dallas.
How many predictions will the CDC be wrong about before they stop chasing it with "Don't worry"?
Thank you! This is one of the biggest points.
Screener:
Did you use needles during your visit?
Did you engage in intercourse with anyone during your visit?
Did you eat any bushmeat during your visit?
(Subject thinking about how a yes to question will seriously inconvenience him and his plans --- and then making the awful assumption everyone does which is to think he's special and probably is not a problem).
Subject: Uhh.. nope. I just bought some postcards and took some pictures. That's all.
Dallas needs to be on lockdown for 21 days. The guy had symptoms for two days before he checked in...
My biggest fear about this is that the CDC has been wrong about their predictions all the way, and now they are CONFIDENT that this new 'blase' reaction to this guy is going to be enough and that we should (as they said in everything else that was wrong) 'not worry'. NOT WORRY? How about the people at the CDC show me that THEY are worried and working really goddamned hard to quarantine this plague -- that way I don't have to worry.
It's as if they're imagining the most positive outcomes and betting on it. PEOPLE'S FECAL MATTER GETS ON EVERYTHING! It's because we're animals! It's because we don't really wash our hands for 1 minute of scrubbing. Can we just get a grip on this and make everyone going to infected areas wait 2-3 weeks before they can travel? Is a little discomfort worth avoiding to put everyone at risk?
I'd love to see the CDC spokespeople bet their lives on their predictions. Why? If they doubt to bet their life, they will be forced to think about why they won't bet it. With every false confidence they project, they put us at risk.
They are what I term, Tupac-Christians. It's where you wear a gold chain and cross and you talk about 'god' and such, but you've only got a few toes in the pool of faith and you spend 99% of your time contradicting the faith. From my experience, most people that call themselves Christians fit this model, and most people that I would think are adhering closely to Jesus/Bible, would say that those other people are not real Christians.
Where will we get the endless stream of videos of people hurting themselves doing foolish things? That's a pretty big share of the internet right there!
Way to miss the point. If you have the mindset of losing, you will lose. If you think your work is not marketable, you won't.
Do you know that fundamental science requires tools? Did you know that the best labs that find out amazing basic science findings get there by innovating amazing new tools? DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE REFEFRENCE TO JC VENTER? The human genome sequence is, in itself, hard to market and sell. The sequence was first found by one man, JC Venter. He beat a huge army of publicly funded labs. While those labs used existing technologies to each try to sequence parts of the genome and get together to glue sequences together, Venter innovated highly improved DNA sequencing technlology. And thus he sequenced the human genome first. Guess what followed? All of those labs, and more, bought his sequencing technology and the models to follow.
If you can't find something to sell then you're destined to beg for money. I'd love to see a world without money that allocates resource based on meritocracy... But that's not reality.
You may think I need to grow up, but I can guarantee you that you need to wake up and smell the coffee of capitalism and try to identify how to get what you want. If you're in the US and you will always beg for money, try your hardest to Elect Elizabeth Warren as president because she wants to double NIH funding.
FWIW.
If you choose to read it in an insulting way, it is insulting. Or you can understand the gist of it which is to say 'pull yourself up from your perceived limitations and do what is necessary to rise to a superior position in life." But.... You know.... You're interested in arguing about communication, and not staying on topic; The next generation of wasted life. I can guarantee you that you'll grow a lot more in life by staying focused. Then again, if you're here to learn about communication and not about the subject, this is right up your alley.
Right. But with good design, the water can be stored efficiently without evaporation, and the top of the container could possibly be engineered to collect/filter rainwater as well as an added benefit. I'm not trying to give you the best solution -- its just a simple idea I have always considered; loading electrical energy into physical potential energy by way of working against gravity. Maybe, instead, just run a big heavy chunk of metal up a notched pole? Then release it to spin a worm gear, to a large cog, then big generator as it slowly drops?
If I had resources, time, and money, I'd love to live out in a cabin somewhere and toy around with simplified energy storage solutions.
You should consider a pump that pushes water up and then a pelton wheel for the release of pressure on the way down. It's not the most efficient but it's smart.
I am super excited. The graphene capacitors from UCLA (about 18 months ago) can now be scaled up. They hired some company to try to scale up their tech, but maybe this finding can help. The implications for this is that new technologies are going to arrive in your hands and homes. Enjoy.
Lacking the capacity to think outside of the mainstream function of waiting in line for a dollar that isn't there.
Man up and make a company. Public funding isn't the only funding. If your ideas are valuable, market them. Summon the JC Venter in you.
Also, I am an engineer of sorts (cell biology). I use Celsius and meters every day. My understanding of a variety of units of measure only helped to understand the original point the OP was making, which was to say "awkward unit system you use". If you can get over that hangup, you might actually be part of the real conversation.
Remember --- if you can't tie your shoes, you'll never make it to work today.
The topic is not units of measure. The topic is about the teaching of the scientific process. You're getting hung up on insignificant side topics that aren't going to contribute to the topic.