The human brain and nervous system evolved in the presence of natural stimuli and is prepared for these. Often the kinds of shortcuts it made to handle this information worked well in our evolutionary history but fail us now.
Additionally cities are human constructs and as such attract a great deal of attention from human brains, a cockroach would likely not feel as significant a difference in the surroundings (forest-city)
A leech because we want to explore the internet without unsolicited ads? A user may be interested in exploring a sites content only to be exposed to unsolicited (and importantly here, unannounced) advertising. Seems to me like adblocker is a great service
Just because you make money from ads doesn't mean it's the only way for "society" to grow fruitfully, in fact I'd argue that it is unnecessary (though heavily relied upon because it is an option). That advertising provides disproportionate support to aspects of society that I don't want to support, and would otherwise perish or wither due to lack of social recognition and discussion
Frick yeah - I say diversity in the gene pool is always a plus with the population boom we are going through. And yeah - I reckon they'd be HOT in bed.
I think I need to redifine the word program in their somwhere. Program/environment should be considered anywhere this program (set of code) could perpetuate (replicating and changing under selection). I guess we have already paved the way for the evolution code with the internet; providing the environment and the seeds of self replicating code. I am now starting to predict the occurrence of virii that were never even written by a man...and given more time (opportunities to replicate) more complex programs (like multicellular organisms) could arise.
Does code replicate itself and could this code be under selective forces?
e.g. code being part of a perpetuate program that allows strings to replicate themselves into the next version and scrap less effective code. This is all it would need to start evolving to better suit it's program/environment.
If the program applied a selective force that lead to sentience (and it's precursor traits) being a useful adaptation, then this should happen.
If not then how do you propose that it would develop a new complex trait like self perception if we don't program it?
I was about to paste this link, I saw this and it reminded me of spacing off in botany lectures imagining a similar improvement to current photovoltaic systems. In plants, many light harvesting complexes use light energy to excite electrons and shunt them to the the reaction centre.
A guy annoys people. The government restrict his freedom for 2 years for doing so. He freaks out and escapes, kills those around him and then himself.
My conjecture that he freaked out, but this is the only way I can percieve the case when his previous crime was simply annoying ppl and he precipitously committed murder-suicide.
Having seen it all laid out I have sympathy for the man and his family. I also feel angry that diverse people are treated to a common punishment (imprisonment) for such a wide range of socially unnaceptable behaviour.
I agree (belatedly) there will certainly be sub-populations that are less diverse at these markers and will as such have higher probability of identity within that population. This lowers the power of those markers and probabilities given to prosecutors need to be adjusted accordingly.
The probabilities are or at least should be calculated and adjusted as more data is sampled. These values are referred to as a probability of identity for each marker P(ID). Importantly, due to relatedness of individuals in some communities exceeding their relatedness to the population at large, calculating the likelihood of a match in would need refined probabilities derived from that population
Glad to see mention of the birthday paradox, it illustrates the issue nicely. I worked on a genetic mark recapture program that encountered just this effect. Initially things looked great but as the sample size increased we started encountering "shadows" (individuals that share markers at all loci sampled but aren't true matches) with greater frequency. To study large populations you need markers with significantly lower probability of identity than has been assumed in a lot of research. We often remarked how rediculous the statistics quoted by journalists and in court are.
I use a 15" at work, would much prefer a desktop with a decent screen. By the time you hook up external keyboard and mouse it has to sit so far away you need an external monitor as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh no the books on tape lobby are here...seriously?
no bill of rights over here :(
The human brain and nervous system evolved in the presence of natural stimuli and is prepared for these. Often the kinds of shortcuts it made to handle this information worked well in our evolutionary history but fail us now.
Additionally cities are human constructs and as such attract a great deal of attention from human brains, a cockroach would likely not feel as significant a difference in the surroundings (forest-city)
A leech because we want to explore the internet without unsolicited ads? A user may be interested in exploring a sites content only to be exposed to unsolicited (and importantly here, unannounced) advertising. Seems to me like adblocker is a great service
Just because you make money from ads doesn't mean it's the only way for "society" to grow fruitfully, in fact I'd argue that it is unnecessary (though heavily relied upon because it is an option). That advertising provides disproportionate support to aspects of society that I don't want to support, and would otherwise perish or wither due to lack of social recognition and discussion
Frick yeah - I say diversity in the gene pool is always a plus with the population boom we are going through. And yeah - I reckon they'd be HOT in bed.
It's just an old wise tale
Old wive's tale.
Wives old tale.
Wive's old tail.
Wife sold tail
I think I need to redifine the word program in their somwhere. Program/environment should be considered anywhere this program (set of code) could perpetuate (replicating and changing under selection). I guess we have already paved the way for the evolution code with the internet; providing the environment and the seeds of self replicating code. I am now starting to predict the occurrence of virii that were never even written by a man...and given more time (opportunities to replicate) more complex programs (like multicellular organisms) could arise.
Does code replicate itself and could this code be under selective forces? e.g. code being part of a perpetuate program that allows strings to replicate themselves into the next version and scrap less effective code. This is all it would need to start evolving to better suit it's program/environment. If the program applied a selective force that lead to sentience (and it's precursor traits) being a useful adaptation, then this should happen. If not then how do you propose that it would develop a new complex trait like self perception if we don't program it?
cuiling (hey if googling is a word so is that) "tempt" brings up this article on the front page poking at google management. Arrogant googlers
+1
I was about to paste this link, I saw this and it reminded me of spacing off in botany lectures imagining a similar improvement to current photovoltaic systems. In plants, many light harvesting complexes use light energy to excite electrons and shunt them to the the reaction centre.
A guy annoys people. The government restrict his freedom for 2 years for doing so. He freaks out and escapes, kills those around him and then himself. My conjecture that he freaked out, but this is the only way I can percieve the case when his previous crime was simply annoying ppl and he precipitously committed murder-suicide. Having seen it all laid out I have sympathy for the man and his family. I also feel angry that diverse people are treated to a common punishment (imprisonment) for such a wide range of socially unnaceptable behaviour.
I agree (belatedly) there will certainly be sub-populations that are less diverse at these markers and will as such have higher probability of identity within that population. This lowers the power of those markers and probabilities given to prosecutors need to be adjusted accordingly.
It's news, this discussion dragged me so far from my interest in it that I forgot the point till I read your statement but... definitely /.news
The probabilities are or at least should be calculated and adjusted as more data is sampled. These values are referred to as a probability of identity for each marker P(ID). Importantly, due to relatedness of individuals in some communities exceeding their relatedness to the population at large, calculating the likelihood of a match in would need refined probabilities derived from that population
Glad to see mention of the birthday paradox, it illustrates the issue nicely. I worked on a genetic mark recapture program that encountered just this effect. Initially things looked great but as the sample size increased we started encountering "shadows" (individuals that share markers at all loci sampled but aren't true matches) with greater frequency. To study large populations you need markers with significantly lower probability of identity than has been assumed in a lot of research. We often remarked how rediculous the statistics quoted by journalists and in court are.
I use a 15" at work, would much prefer a desktop with a decent screen. By the time you hook up external keyboard and mouse it has to sit so far away you need an external monitor as well.