Not sure the real level of facetiousness here, but I think that's a pretty insightful comment. [bad analogy] It's like investigating a crime scene - you always have to ask yourself "who's the one really benefiting here"? [/bad analogy]
Good point, although saying anything negative about this could invoke the wrath of nutshell42;^)
That is a good point - the article doesn't specify really how or when the drivers in the chain could gain control. For that matter, the article doesn't even specify how the cars will be linked together. Some mechanical device? Radio control? Tractor beam? It's hard to say what the problems are without knowing this type of info.
Hrmmm...good question. So, if each car saves 20%, you would have to have (20%x5) cars to equal the cost of the truck,in theory. I suppose you could argue that the truck is diesel, and has better economy?? Regardless of the mileage, you're still adding on one new vehicle per train to the already congested roadways.
OK - imagine this scenario: a train is driving along, and something happens to car number 2/8. Hit by another car, flat tire, accidentally leans on the joystick, whatever. The car veers out of control, unlinking cars 3-8. So now you have six cars being manned by people who were sleeping/reading/eating/daydreaming 10 nanoseconds ago.
I'm just sayin, I don't think you could pay me enough to get in one of those trains. Mythbusters did an interesting piece on saving gas by drafting. You could save a great deal of gas, but at great expense to safety.
True - there is even rain inside the large dirigible hangars in NJ, and they're around 100 feet high. There are clouds that form inside them that produce rain.
There's a cool book out by Bill Fawcett called "It Looked Good On Paper" that gives a lot of good (and generally unpublicized) information on Biodome II. Some of the issues:
- Failing air supply (almost immediate). Some outside air had to be pumped in. The levels reached 14% 02 enough to cause brain damage. - Food shortages. - Animal extinction: 19 of the 25 vertebrae species became extinct in the BDII. - Infighting among the crew.
According to Fawcett, the scientists "acknowledged making 10,000 mistakes."
You should check out the book. It's a highly entertaining read that covers disastrous designs from a wide number of areas.
I think this is one of those things that look good on paper, but...
There are so many ways this could go wrong. It might be a way to breed viruses into an entire city, or keep carcinogens trapped for all to breathe. The Biosphere II was a fairly disastrous small scale experiment along these lines. Just imagine having an "oops" moment for a city of 5.7 million.
As a native of the People's Republic of Berkeley, I will be organizing a march to protest this obvious attempt at profiling and oppression. Meanwhile - dude, I've got the munchies...are you going to finish those fries?
OK, I don't want to go too far down this path, because as someone that has made a profession of the cognitive sciences for the last 12 yrs, I would never argue that someones fast twitch reflex fibers could be equated with intelligence. However, even sports announcers say something along the lines of "...Tom Brady just plays smarter than other quarterbacks". There is a neurological component to how he plays well, based on a combination of reflexes, physical strength, neurons firing better, and a billion other components. And I would argue that there is a quality to a good quarterback that one could call "intelligence".
Second point: I would completely agree with you that they are just as biased by saying that the quantum physicist is dumb as we are by saying that someone who lacks social skills is unintelligent *in that area*. Remember, they have multiple scales for intelligence (think of Eskimos and dozens of words for "snow"). My point was not that they or we were right, just that there are different definitions. BTW, I do think that squeezing all that stuff we call "intelligence" into a *single measure* is a pretty dumb thing to do for people who are supposedly smart enough to measure something called intelligence;)
You're missing the point - it's not me that is attempting to re-define intelligence. The other societies I've mentioned have already done that. I'm merely pointing out that we tend to have a very narrow minded view on the subject. Are you really saying that we as a society have a lock on how intelligence is defined?
Actually, it's not *me* that's attempting to make it sound like it is. If you were embedded in one of their tribes, and you lacked hunting/social skills, the tribe would consider you an idiot, no matter how much you knew about quantum physics. And having administered a few IQ tests myself, I can assure you that the WIQ's measures are fairly narrow, as TFA states.
Um...****I believe that is the point I was making****. The "nobody" in your post refers to those who define IQ by 1st world standards. If you were embedded in one of the societies I mentioned, your perceived lack of social skills would make you seem "stupid". Likewise, one who has a high degree of manual dexterity (e.g., a good hunter) is seen as "smart", according to these societies. Just because someone in one of these societies doesn't know who the first person on the moon was, or the meaning of the phrase "strike while the iron is hot" would score them lower on the Wechsler IQ test. Completely meaningless to them.
I find that our "advanced" tests, such as the Wechsler IQ, provide a quite narrow and ethnocentric view of intelligence. Many "underdeveloped societies have multiple scales for measuring intelligence that our tests don't even touch on, such as social skills and dexterity.
You may now proceed with the gaming and nerd humor jokes.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure about that. I think they're trying to distance themselves from Vista. I do agree with you in concept, tho.
FTA: "When the sun is shining there’s no incentive to change the roof on your house. It’s only when its raining that you realise there’s a problem."
Ahem....um...so I guess by rain, you mean some sort of Katrina like attention getter? Sheesh...
According to Starfleet medical research, Borg implants can cause severe skin irritations. Perhaps you'd like an analgesic cream?
Not sure the real level of facetiousness here, but I think that's a pretty insightful comment. [bad analogy] It's like investigating a crime scene - you always have to ask yourself "who's the one really benefiting here"? [/bad analogy]
I used to target womprats in my T-16 in Beggar's Canyon back home.
OBJECTIVES:
- Ridicule PPT presentations (good!)
- Education Rant
- Pitfalls
o Boring
o Lack of connection
o Obligatory MS rant
- Conclusions
Note: there will be a test Thr, make sure you are familiar with this material
...yeah, but I think you put it better. Nicely stated.
Good point, although saying anything negative about this could invoke the wrath of nutshell42 ;^)
That is a good point - the article doesn't specify really how or when the drivers in the chain could gain control. For that matter, the article doesn't even specify how the cars will be linked together. Some mechanical device? Radio control? Tractor beam? It's hard to say what the problems are without knowing this type of info.
Hrmmm...good question. So, if each car saves 20%, you would have to have (20%x5) cars to equal the cost of the truck,in theory. I suppose you could argue that the truck is diesel, and has better economy?? Regardless of the mileage, you're still adding on one new vehicle per train to the already congested roadways.
OK - imagine this scenario: a train is driving along, and something happens to car number 2/8. Hit by another car, flat tire, accidentally leans on the joystick, whatever. The car veers out of control, unlinking cars 3-8. So now you have six cars being manned by people who were sleeping/reading/eating/daydreaming 10 nanoseconds ago.
I'm just sayin, I don't think you could pay me enough to get in one of those trains. Mythbusters did an interesting piece on saving gas by drafting. You could save a great deal of gas, but at great expense to safety.
I was thinking the same thing - but from TFA, apparently the plastic composite glass is "self cleaning".
True - there is even rain inside the large dirigible hangars in NJ, and they're around 100 feet high. There are clouds that form inside them that produce rain.
There's a cool book out by Bill Fawcett called "It Looked Good On Paper" that gives a lot of good (and generally unpublicized) information on Biodome II. Some of the issues:
- Failing air supply (almost immediate). Some outside air had to be pumped in. The levels reached 14% 02 enough to cause brain damage.
- Food shortages.
- Animal extinction: 19 of the 25 vertebrae species became extinct in the BDII.
- Infighting among the crew.
According to Fawcett, the scientists "acknowledged making 10,000 mistakes."
You should check out the book. It's a highly entertaining read that covers disastrous designs from a wide number of areas.
I think this is one of those things that look good on paper, but...
There are so many ways this could go wrong. It might be a way to breed viruses into an entire city, or keep carcinogens trapped for all to breathe. The Biosphere II was a fairly disastrous small scale experiment along these lines. Just imagine having an "oops" moment for a city of 5.7 million.
Re-program it, and send it back to earth to seek out the maker.
...our Cnidarian Overlords
We should all change to meet his business goals. You all need to stop being so self centered.
As a native of the People's Republic of Berkeley, I will be organizing a march to protest this obvious attempt at profiling and oppression. Meanwhile - dude, I've got the munchies...are you going to finish those fries?
"...because I feel every creature is entitled to a warm meal"
OK, I don't want to go too far down this path, because as someone that has made a profession of the cognitive sciences for the last 12 yrs, I would never argue that someones fast twitch reflex fibers could be equated with intelligence. However, even sports announcers say something along the lines of "...Tom Brady just plays smarter than other quarterbacks". There is a neurological component to how he plays well, based on a combination of reflexes, physical strength, neurons firing better, and a billion other components. And I would argue that there is a quality to a good quarterback that one could call "intelligence".
Second point: I would completely agree with you that they are just as biased by saying that the quantum physicist is dumb as we are by saying that someone who lacks social skills is unintelligent *in that area*. Remember, they have multiple scales for intelligence (think of Eskimos and dozens of words for "snow"). My point was not that they or we were right, just that there are different definitions. BTW, I do think that squeezing all that stuff we call "intelligence" into a *single measure* is a pretty dumb thing to do for people who are supposedly smart enough to measure something called intelligence ;)
You're missing the point - it's not me that is attempting to re-define intelligence. The other societies I've mentioned have already done that. I'm merely pointing out that we tend to have a very narrow minded view on the subject. Are you really saying that we as a society have a lock on how intelligence is defined?
Actually, it's not *me* that's attempting to make it sound like it is. If you were embedded in one of their tribes, and you lacked hunting/social skills, the tribe would consider you an idiot, no matter how much you knew about quantum physics. And having administered a few IQ tests myself, I can assure you that the WIQ's measures are fairly narrow, as TFA states.
Um...****I believe that is the point I was making****. The "nobody" in your post refers to those who define IQ by 1st world standards. If you were embedded in one of the societies I mentioned, your perceived lack of social skills would make you seem "stupid". Likewise, one who has a high degree of manual dexterity (e.g., a good hunter) is seen as "smart", according to these societies. Just because someone in one of these societies doesn't know who the first person on the moon was, or the meaning of the phrase "strike while the iron is hot" would score them lower on the Wechsler IQ test. Completely meaningless to them.
I find that our "advanced" tests, such as the Wechsler IQ, provide a quite narrow and ethnocentric view of intelligence. Many "underdeveloped societies have multiple scales for measuring intelligence that our tests don't even touch on, such as social skills and dexterity.
You may now proceed with the gaming and nerd humor jokes.
With the hours I've spent on it, I'm pretty overqualified to do the demo if they need me.