I have to wonder why the researchers didn't expand this theory to include homosexuals, bisexuals, or asexuals -- before publishing results claiming every man out there can be rendered temporarily stupid by an attractive woman.
The trivial answer to your question is that 90% of people are heterosexual. Much easier to find a large group of heterosexual subjects. They are seeking to validate/invalidate a theory that cognitive resources will be dedicated to trying to attract potential reproductive mates.
A possible reason to exclude homosexuals could be that homosexuals (both their existence and their choices of mate) are more difficult to explain evolutionarily. How do you choose a homosexual partner based on evolutionary fitness?
It would not be uninteresting to see if similar reductions in performance are found in homosexuals recently in the company of those they found attractive. But it might answer a different set of questions.
There is a substantial background of research (often just speculation) into aspects of male behaviour that might be explained as trying to get a mate. Dangerous, thrill seeking behaviour for example: it has been suggested that this might be due to sexual selection (by females) in favour of those males who are particularly strong or resilient.
What I would find interesting would be to see if there was any statistically different performance between attached and unattached people "exposed to" attractive people.
Is the take home message send your very stylish colleague with great taste in furnishings in to meet the hot sales rep?
I think kids should come to work or work around the house with their parents more so they can see what "work" is and how it actually gets done.
Such a system would be a very effective way to lock in low-to-zero social mobility even further for children of low socio-economic status parents.
Sounds great if daddy/mummy is a lawyer, but not great at all if they are unemployed or are a cleaner.
So I will consult you for the exhaustive list of permissible market distortions at a later date.
What a curious mix you are:
free market zealot:
having the government draft Sue into providing free healthcare to Joe
environmentalist/ludicrously naive about the abilities of a market driven corporate owned media (who is going to tell the public about the pollution? not big government- see above. When the public is eventually told by the media, the share price of the polluter will go down I presume. The omniscient and ever beneficent Market will do its work eventually, yes?):
and Joe can't work because he's sick from the pollution caused by Bill
anti immigration/isolationist
and letting Raul into the country in order to do Bob's job for lower wages doesn't actually fix anything
Oh apocalyptic, too
It just wards off complete collapse for a little while longer.
To my knowledge there has never been a country or group of them that met your criteria for Market-correctness, it seems that the last few centuries have been anomalous in their broad improvement of people's living conditions?
Or would we all be incalculably better off had the Market Most Holy been allowed free rein?
Real world check:
Which country does Bob flee to? Any countries closer to laissez-faire purity than the US? I know that you consider the US to be headed towards fatally distorting the Market, but where actually distorts it less than America?
What happens anywhere when there is a run on the bank?
IBM, Accenture, and HP, we can do that. What do they all have in common? They all make shit-tons of money automating entire workforces and putting people out of work.
understandable that innovative, productive businesses like IBM, HP and Accenture that have zero reason to be physically located in the US would decide to up and leave.
I can only assume from the tone of your free market zealotry that you think "productive" is a good thing. Putting people out of work is a good thing, I suppose? Yes, it is the progress of the Market. But what are we to do with those put out of work? Let the Devil Take the Hindmost?
I imagine that many of acts of unwarranted force you list in your second paragraph would be considered by many to be the valid government interventions you describe in your first paragraph.
A "pure" economy, free of such unwarranted forces would end up as let-the-Devil-take-the-hindmost.
The point is that people have been told for the last 30-40 years that "business" (whatever that actually means) is intrinsically good for the western world.
Many people believed this, and now they are surprised.
verizon DIDNT fire him DESPITE his actions would mean an almost certain victory for the victim against Verizon in any civil suit along with hefty punitive damages
That would indeed be some most enjoyable schadenfreude.
But I thought America was controlled by the Free Market?
The Holy Market will surely solve all problems and keep employees in line?
Or is this perhaps an early symptom of Obamunism?
He would be fired in filthy socialist Europe by now....
You are a surprisingly stupid man. You did not pay for all of the road, it took an organised collection of money to build it.
Do you think the murder rate was higher or lower a few hundred years ago in what was to become the United States?
You benefit from not having gangs of teenagers running free on the streets; thanks to compulsory, paid by tax education. You benefit from again from compulsory education when children from families with little money get education and therefore (very slightly, you will say. Cos gubmint can't do no good) increased chances of social mobility.(And lower chance of becoming criminals- poverty and criminal behaviour being correlated)
Your economy depends to fairly large degree on the military industrial complex. Paid for by tax dollars.
Your food is cheaper because your farmers are very, very heavily subsidised.
You benefit from having some semblance of health care for even those at the bottom of the economic pile (herd immunity etc.)
Your vile views are what is wrong with most Western countries. Hope you enjoy life through the Conservapedia lens.
Just in case any USians are reading this and mistakenly think FourthAge are a reasonable wo/man:
The Daily Mail is attacking ID cards because it hates, hates, hates the current UK government. Think of them Fox News in newspaper form.
This is the newspaper who supported fascists: proper, genuine article fascists in the 1930s (A little Daily Mail scare tactic there for you, FourthAge. Inconvenient Truths-out-of-context are wonderful, aren't they?)
They happen to be on the right side this time, these ID cards will be a disaster.
But the Daily Mail is seriously unpleasant publication.
walk into an Apple Store and all you see are monitors, with wires running into holes in the counter where the mysterious computers are hidden
Spoken like a man who hasn't been in many Apple Shops.
I am very familiar with 2 different shops (in 2 diff countries).
The iMacs and their keyboards sit on a table, as do all the laptops, and I am 95% sure Mac Pros are also clearly on display, with the cases on the same tables and counters.
Even if you aren't being disingenous but are merely being thick, consider this:
Apple computers are partly sold on being "pretty" why would they hide all that design for which they are (I'm sure you would insist) price gouging?
They are going to show off their key selling points are they not?
Take your tired, lazy prejudice back to the linux forum.
(The most generous I can come up with is that iPods have trailing leads that disappear under the table and you are confused by that.)
I always think it's funny how people think of minidisc as a failure.
It dodn't sell particularly well in North America or Europe. But you probably aren't aware of how fabulously successful it was in Japan/Korea.
Sony certainly didn't lose money on it. You could fit a portable player in a normal sized pocket, and put spare discs in the same pocket. You could double the capacity by sacrificing sound quality. And of course it was recordable. All in all, much better than owning both a portable cd player and tape player.
A very good product, expecially for "taping" your friends' cds. And everyone reading this knows that taping your friends' music is what turns you into a high hundreds/low thousands album buyer.
Re: your requirement for customisablility at the lowest level; you are in a tiny, tiny minority.Apple does not need your custom.
RE Li-ion battery: it takes a spudger to replace the battery(Well, that may depend on the model). Since you presumably have higher than average technical knowhow that shouldn't hold you back.
Show pictures of various individuals to large numbers of other individuals - get ratings for attractiveness from all the viewers. In this study it is likely it was show pictures of women to large numbers of men.
The ones with higher average scores are "more attractive"
Women's average earnings will stay lower than men's average earnings until there is no difference in the average amount of time spent as primary caregivers to offspring.
Employers pay for (among other things) experience. Spending less time at work in order to be a primary caregiver reduces the amount of experience you can gain and offer to potential employers.
The museum can state any terms of use it likes, but that doesn't create a legally binding contract with someone who visits their web site.
He didnt just visit their website, he went to a lot of trouble to take more data than they were offering.
...sex....daughter.....Doesn't mean I have a legally enforceable contract.
Thanks for the comedy example, not very helpful. You might have one if the act took place (legally speaking) in a jurisdiction where such conditions are recognised.
Nope, he was just obeying the laws of the country where he lived....
He may live in the United States, but it seems possible to me that infringing act may have taken place (legally speaking) in the United Kingdom. You seem to have nothing to say about the ambiguity. Do you really believe there is none?
Why is the number of people who benefit relevant?
The low number of people who benefit suggest to me that Dcoetzee was not being "a hero of the people". He was going to a lot of trouble to make a point about "information wanting to be free". He was not simply obeying the laws of his land, he had obviously heard of laws in Britain of which he disapproved and sought to make a point.
......laws of Uganda and Outer Mongolia.
I can name bogeyman countries too: Chinese software pirates don't consider themselves to be subject to Western Copyright laws. They are heroes, are they not?
Slashdot Mirror
The trivial answer to your question is that 90% of people are heterosexual. Much easier to find a large group of heterosexual subjects. They are seeking to validate/invalidate a theory that cognitive resources will be dedicated to trying to attract potential reproductive mates. A possible reason to exclude homosexuals could be that homosexuals (both their existence and their choices of mate) are more difficult to explain evolutionarily. How do you choose a homosexual partner based on evolutionary fitness?
It would not be uninteresting to see if similar reductions in performance are found in homosexuals recently in the company of those they found attractive. But it might answer a different set of questions.
There is a substantial background of research (often just speculation) into aspects of male behaviour that might be explained as trying to get a mate. Dangerous, thrill seeking behaviour for example: it has been suggested that this might be due to sexual selection (by females) in favour of those males who are particularly strong or resilient.
What I would find interesting would be to see if there was any statistically different performance between attached and unattached people "exposed to" attractive people.
Is the take home message send your very stylish colleague with great taste in furnishings in to meet the hot sales rep?
Such a system would be a very effective way to lock in low-to-zero social mobility even further for children of low socio-economic status parents. Sounds great if daddy/mummy is a lawyer, but not great at all if they are unemployed or are a cleaner.
What a curious mix you are:
free market zealot:
environmentalist/ludicrously naive about the abilities of a market driven corporate owned media (who is going to tell the public about the pollution? not big government- see above. When the public is eventually told by the media, the share price of the polluter will go down I presume. The omniscient and ever beneficent Market will do its work eventually, yes?):
anti immigration/isolationist
Oh apocalyptic, too
To my knowledge there has never been a country or group of them that met your criteria for Market-correctness, it seems that the last few centuries have been anomalous in their broad improvement of people's living conditions?
Or would we all be incalculably better off had the Market Most Holy been allowed free rein?
Real world check:
Which country does Bob flee to? Any countries closer to laissez-faire purity than the US? I know that you consider the US to be headed towards fatally distorting the Market, but where actually distorts it less than America?
What happens anywhere when there is a run on the bank?
I can only assume from the tone of your free market zealotry that you think "productive" is a good thing. Putting people out of work is a good thing, I suppose? Yes, it is the progress of the Market. But what are we to do with those put out of work? Let the Devil Take the Hindmost?
I almost didn't see through your scare quotes there:-)
By ""fairness"" (help me, the big boy said a bad word!) do you mean the very laudable notion of having everyone play by the same rules?
A "pure" economy, free of such unwarranted forces would end up as let-the-Devil-take-the-hindmost.
We need to pick a point somewhere on the line.
Attempt to change the legislation and be called an America-hating Hitler-Nazi-Communist-Socialist-Terrorist-Muslim-Paedophile.
The point is that people have been told for the last 30-40 years that "business" (whatever that actually means) is intrinsically good for the western world. Many people believed this, and now they are surprised.
Here's another workaround idea: Can this be crowdsourced? Get everyone to agree to inout a certain amount of data?
That would indeed be some most enjoyable schadenfreude.
He would be fired in filthy socialist Europe by now....
Do you think the murder rate was higher or lower a few hundred years ago in what was to become the United States?
You benefit from not having gangs of teenagers running free on the streets; thanks to compulsory, paid by tax education. You benefit from again from compulsory education when children from families with little money get education and therefore (very slightly, you will say. Cos gubmint can't do no good) increased chances of social mobility.(And lower chance of becoming criminals- poverty and criminal behaviour being correlated)
Your economy depends to fairly large degree on the military industrial complex. Paid for by tax dollars.
Your food is cheaper because your farmers are very, very heavily subsidised.
You benefit from having some semblance of health care for even those at the bottom of the economic pile (herd immunity etc.)
Your vile views are what is wrong with most Western countries. Hope you enjoy life through the Conservapedia lens.
I call your goal chaos not society. Plutocracy, not democracy. Enjoy your drive home on state and other-taxpayer funded road.
The Daily Mail is attacking ID cards because it hates, hates, hates the current UK government. Think of them Fox News in newspaper form.
This is the newspaper who supported fascists: proper, genuine article fascists in the 1930s (A little Daily Mail scare tactic there for you, FourthAge. Inconvenient Truths-out-of-context are wonderful, aren't they?)
They happen to be on the right side this time, these ID cards will be a disaster. But the Daily Mail is seriously unpleasant publication.
Don't expect any evidence for someone whose sig says 1984 is the goal of socialism.
Spoken like a man who hasn't been in many Apple Shops. I am very familiar with 2 different shops (in 2 diff countries). The iMacs and their keyboards sit on a table, as do all the laptops, and I am 95% sure Mac Pros are also clearly on display, with the cases on the same tables and counters.
Even if you aren't being disingenous but are merely being thick, consider this:
Apple computers are partly sold on being "pretty" why would they hide all that design for which they are (I'm sure you would insist) price gouging? They are going to show off their key selling points are they not? Take your tired, lazy prejudice back to the linux forum. (The most generous I can come up with is that iPods have trailing leads that disappear under the table and you are confused by that.)
Only in America
It dodn't sell particularly well in North America or Europe. But you probably aren't aware of how fabulously successful it was in Japan/Korea.
Sony certainly didn't lose money on it. You could fit a portable player in a normal sized pocket, and put spare discs in the same pocket. You could double the capacity by sacrificing sound quality. And of course it was recordable. All in all, much better than owning both a portable cd player and tape player.
A very good product, expecially for "taping" your friends' cds. And everyone reading this knows that taping your friends' music is what turns you into a high hundreds/low thousands album buyer.
RE Li-ion battery: it takes a spudger to replace the battery(Well, that may depend on the model). Since you presumably have higher than average technical knowhow that shouldn't hold you back.
Does anyone know if there is evidence that "sex offenders" are more recidivist than other offenders?
The ones with higher average scores are "more attractive"
Not that hard really.
Re: "beauty" if people get more attractive on average will it make any difference? Is attractiveness relative or absolute?
Employers pay for (among other things) experience. Spending less time at work in order to be a primary caregiver reduces the amount of experience you can gain and offer to potential employers.
I think this belongs on boingboing
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/07/16/mystery-blob-devouri.html
He didnt just visit their website, he went to a lot of trouble to take more data than they were offering.
Thanks for the comedy example, not very helpful. You might have one if the act took place (legally speaking) in a jurisdiction where such conditions are recognised.
He may live in the United States, but it seems possible to me that infringing act may have taken place (legally speaking) in the United Kingdom. You seem to have nothing to say about the ambiguity. Do you really believe there is none?
The low number of people who benefit suggest to me that Dcoetzee was not being "a hero of the people". He was going to a lot of trouble to make a point about "information wanting to be free". He was not simply obeying the laws of his land, he had obviously heard of laws in Britain of which he disapproved and sought to make a point.
I can name bogeyman countries too: Chinese software pirates don't consider themselves to be subject to Western Copyright laws. They are heroes, are they not?