Apparently it is, if you're in the military and the "things" you are speaking out against are the United States and/or its armed forces. Uniform Code of Military Justice, article 134: "GENERAL ARTICLE: Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special , or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court."
Huh? That happens all the time. Microsoft needs defensive patents; &c. Then someone brings up the offensive FAT lawsuits, and TomTom GPS settlement, &c.
I agree, the pacing in A Fire Upon the Deep was... challenging, but I thought the ideas were great. I liked how the dogs "discovered" solitude and selective communication and, with it, fascism. I think that Deepness is much better, plot-wise and stylistically. If you ever feel like giving him another shot, I recommend it. He can't do character development for beans of course but this seems like par for libertarian-bent writers./flamebait
BTW, I'm not a Vinge fanboy or anything, but I haven't found anyone else who merges pretty-hard science and space opera, with cyber/neuro-punk themes. I tried to read Banks' Excession (it was just the one I happened to pick up), but this was tedious and the "ship talk" was poorly edited and just read like bad fanfic. (I do like Banks' mainstream novels though: at least, Wasp Factory and Complicity.)
It's easy to tell stories like this, but instead of elaboration and puffery, we need to consider the counterfactual: what would have happened if this engineer had not had as much education?
It's quite plausible that he'd still have made the same stupid mistake, but under different auspices. Same outcome; different aesthetic.
And your story completely veers off the point when you start talking about the state. That's just corruption, and low- to mid-level politicians are often (not always) poorly educated to boot.
Vernor Vinge does a lot of this. My favorite, where the "aliens" are two rival bands of humans visiting another planet and competing to establish first contact, is A Deepness in the Sky. I wish I could say more, but even describing the overall structure of the story would involve a spoiler.:-/ It's loosely a sequel to A Fire Upon the Deep, but they can be read interchangably.
I would have sniffed at this kind of stuff before, but having read Deepness... I think it's worth spending some resources to keep an eye open.
(Yeah, I know; most likely, they could wipe us out without blinking an eye. But that wouldn't be very interesting.;-)
Yeah, but IQ is both more "existential" and harder to treat a deficiency of. It's just worth it to be very careful statistically when discussing intelligence and race (and especially if, god help you, you discuss them both at once).
Or probably I'm just being pedantic because I'm teaching intro stats this term.;-)
Only because you (we) set up "smartness" as something vague and unmeasurable...:-/
The correlation between IQ and income is highly non-traditional (i.e. it's not bivariate normal-distributed, so it requires a more in-depth description than one correlation coefficient; for example, a so-called "copula"). To quote your link: "Some researchers claim that `in economic terms it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much.'" This contradicts what is usually meant by correlation.
As Warren Buffett said, to get rich all you need IQ-wise is to be about 2 sigmas above the mean (and keep in mind, Mr. Buffett probably has a fairly august standard for "rich"; by commoner-standards, probably 1-1.5 sigmas is enough). The rest comes from personality, &c.
First, I think the anti-DRM people probably go to the cinema less often than "normals".
Also, DRM seems more unfair on a gut level. Why can't you take the cinema home with you? Well, it's a huge screen. Duh. Why does the book go away after a while? Because it's rigged to die.
Having 2^(x+3) bits has not a lot to do with the fact that you then have 2^(2^(x+3)) combinations of them... (except for certain integer math operations which are for implementation reasons faster if done on a power-of-2 number of bits, like cryptography. But this is not a fundamental matter.)
Also, "quantum logical units" made me vomit in my mouth.
It has nothing to do with IC design. It has everything to do with thermodynamics; quantum computation; and information theory.
I've taken at least one course in each and done graduate research in two topics. I know that you are spouting garbage comparable to the political "analysis" done on cable news channels (fox or cnn, your pick), and I just want you to admit it.
This ridiculous faith in the magic of human technology, to the point of questioning fundamental physical facts because "they'll probably be overcome later" is personally insulting to me.
That's fine; there might be a revolution in physics, and this incredibly remote theoretical limit may be rescinded. I won't hold my breath.
I was specifically asking about what argument he was referring to which was stronger. Extrapolating from a naively-fitted curve, for instance, would be an example of an argument which is weaker.
How can you have stronger reasoning, than something that's based on the limits of what modern physics can understand (thermodynamics and quantum mechanics)? We have developed quantum computers.
There's skepticism, and then there is metaphysical woowoo babble. You are generating the latter. Kill yourself.
They do acknowledge that; have extremely elaborate physical and statistical models for it; and do the best they can with data from a huge number of sources. That you believe otherwise about these things, almost invalidates anything you have to say. I mean, you're not even saying that they're wrong; you seem really to be saying that they haven't even thought of fitting a model like f(x)=c*sin(a*x)+b*x.
My mom read the radio transcript to me as a bedtime story; I wore down the VHS recording of the miniseries off PBS; and I read the novels when I was 10 or so. I still felt like I got more out of it after a long break (and after college).
Christ I hate grade-grubbing vermin. Still, I've made it all the way to a good grad school on pure idealism and I've gotta say; 1) it's the most miserable and exhausting way to get anything done it the long run, and 2) no one makes it through unscathed.
Sadly his humor is largely lost on kids who don't do much critical thinking
I think you accidentally hit on the point OP was making here. People don't have to get Hitchhiker's, because it can be read on a lighter level. It's great that you were able to get it immediately, but those who didn't (and note, this doesn't necessarily mean anything about their intelligence; just their temperament) have a much better chance after reading Camus and Kafka (and these are worth reading anyway!).
There is plenty of literature which isn't boring. Hitchhiker's Guide is a fun read and clever at spots, and I'll admit that it is very successful at using humor to present an absurdist universe. This is, however, basically the only thing it's notable for and its hardly unique there. Hitchhiker's is something to enjoy and then maybe go back and appreciate, once you've read some real literature. Nothing wrong with that.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently it is, if you're in the military and the "things" you are speaking out against are the United States and/or its armed forces. Uniform Code of Military Justice, article 134: "GENERAL ARTICLE: Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special , or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_article_(military_law)
Admittedly that's the final "catch all" article intended to close the loopholes above. Still, by the letter of the law...
Huh? That happens all the time. Microsoft needs defensive patents; &c. Then someone brings up the offensive FAT lawsuits, and TomTom GPS settlement, &c.
Isn't the idea to wait to lock in until, oh, at least 10% of the population is actually using your product?
How surprising that MS couldn't hold off that long.
I agree, the pacing in A Fire Upon the Deep was ... challenging, but I thought the ideas were great. I liked how the dogs "discovered" solitude and selective communication and, with it, fascism. I think that Deepness is much better, plot-wise and stylistically. If you ever feel like giving him another shot, I recommend it. He can't do character development for beans of course but this seems like par for libertarian-bent writers. /flamebait
BTW, I'm not a Vinge fanboy or anything, but I haven't found anyone else who merges pretty-hard science and space opera, with cyber/neuro-punk themes. I tried to read Banks' Excession (it was just the one I happened to pick up), but this was tedious and the "ship talk" was poorly edited and just read like bad fanfic. (I do like Banks' mainstream novels though: at least, Wasp Factory and Complicity.)
It's easy to tell stories like this, but instead of elaboration and puffery, we need to consider the counterfactual: what would have happened if this engineer had not had as much education?
It's quite plausible that he'd still have made the same stupid mistake, but under different auspices. Same outcome; different aesthetic.
And your story completely veers off the point when you start talking about the state. That's just corruption, and low- to mid-level politicians are often (not always) poorly educated to boot.
Vernor Vinge does a lot of this. My favorite, where the "aliens" are two rival bands of humans visiting another planet and competing to establish first contact, is A Deepness in the Sky. I wish I could say more, but even describing the overall structure of the story would involve a spoiler. :-/ It's loosely a sequel to A Fire Upon the Deep, but they can be read interchangably.
I would have sniffed at this kind of stuff before, but having read Deepness... I think it's worth spending some resources to keep an eye open.
(Yeah, I know; most likely, they could wipe us out without blinking an eye. But that wouldn't be very interesting. ;-)
Yeah, but IQ is both more "existential" and harder to treat a deficiency of. It's just worth it to be very careful statistically when discussing intelligence and race (and especially if, god help you, you discuss them both at once).
Or probably I'm just being pedantic because I'm teaching intro stats this term. ;-)
Only because you (we) set up "smartness" as something vague and unmeasurable... :-/
The correlation between IQ and income is highly non-traditional (i.e. it's not bivariate normal-distributed, so it requires a more in-depth description than one correlation coefficient; for example, a so-called "copula"). To quote your link: "Some researchers claim that `in economic terms it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much.'" This contradicts what is usually meant by correlation.
As Warren Buffett said, to get rich all you need IQ-wise is to be about 2 sigmas above the mean (and keep in mind, Mr. Buffett probably has a fairly august standard for "rich"; by commoner-standards, probably 1-1.5 sigmas is enough). The rest comes from personality, &c.
Why?
I dunno. Has he tried to grope Summer Glau yet?
First, I think the anti-DRM people probably go to the cinema less often than "normals".
Also, DRM seems more unfair on a gut level. Why can't you take the cinema home with you? Well, it's a huge screen. Duh. Why does the book go away after a while? Because it's rigged to die.
Having 2^(x+3) bits has not a lot to do with the fact that you then have 2^(2^(x+3)) combinations of them... (except for certain integer math operations which are for implementation reasons faster if done on a power-of-2 number of bits, like cryptography. But this is not a fundamental matter.)
Also, "quantum logical units" made me vomit in my mouth.
So you're saying: Tension, Apprehension, and Dissension have begun.
Tension, Apprehension and Dissension have begun.
Tension, Apprehension and Dissension have begun.
Fucking mysticist Randroids.
"The capitalism you can achieve, is not the True Capitalism."
Not all "3d surfaces" are spheres... :-/
I (Florida) didn't get fingerprinted for my ID. I don't think I even got printed for my passport, but that might have changed now?
It has nothing to do with IC design. It has everything to do with thermodynamics; quantum computation; and information theory.
I've taken at least one course in each and done graduate research in two topics. I know that you are spouting garbage comparable to the political "analysis" done on cable news channels (fox or cnn, your pick), and I just want you to admit it.
This ridiculous faith in the magic of human technology, to the point of questioning fundamental physical facts because "they'll probably be overcome later" is personally insulting to me.
As I said above, I'm looking for the strong argument.
"Limits of physics may be overturned," is not one.
That's fine; there might be a revolution in physics, and this incredibly remote theoretical limit may be rescinded. I won't hold my breath.
I was specifically asking about what argument he was referring to which was stronger. Extrapolating from a naively-fitted curve, for instance, would be an example of an argument which is weaker.
Is that eloquent enough for you, parasite?
How can you have stronger reasoning, than something that's based on the limits of what modern physics can understand (thermodynamics and quantum mechanics)? We have developed quantum computers.
There's skepticism, and then there is metaphysical woowoo babble. You are generating the latter. Kill yourself.
They do acknowledge that; have extremely elaborate physical and statistical models for it; and do the best they can with data from a huge number of sources. That you believe otherwise about these things, almost invalidates anything you have to say. I mean, you're not even saying that they're wrong; you seem really to be saying that they haven't even thought of fitting a model like f(x)=c*sin(a*x)+b*x.
My mom read the radio transcript to me as a bedtime story; I wore down the VHS recording of the miniseries off PBS; and I read the novels when I was 10 or so. I still felt like I got more out of it after a long break (and after college).
Christ I hate grade-grubbing vermin. Still, I've made it all the way to a good grad school on pure idealism and I've gotta say; 1) it's the most miserable and exhausting way to get anything done it the long run, and 2) no one makes it through unscathed.
Sadly his humor is largely lost on kids who don't do much critical thinking
I think you accidentally hit on the point OP was making here. People don't have to get Hitchhiker's, because it can be read on a lighter level. It's great that you were able to get it immediately, but those who didn't (and note, this doesn't necessarily mean anything about their intelligence; just their temperament) have a much better chance after reading Camus and Kafka (and these are worth reading anyway!).
There is plenty of literature which isn't boring. Hitchhiker's Guide is a fun read and clever at spots, and I'll admit that it is very successful at using humor to present an absurdist universe. This is, however, basically the only thing it's notable for and its hardly unique there. Hitchhiker's is something to enjoy and then maybe go back and appreciate, once you've read some real literature. Nothing wrong with that.
Florida in the summer... Italy in summer.
Speaking as a Floridian: at least you can take some of that $100K and use it for psychotherapy. ;-)