After much thought, I've stopped believing in stupidity. We are all born knowing effectively nothing at all, and have to accumulate knowledge a little at a time. The learning curve flattens out sooner for some than for others. Barring some biochemical limitation (as in your example), I think this is determined at least as much by motivation as by capacity. Therefore, we shouldn't think of people as stupid, but incurious.
... let me point out several things you appear to have overlooked.
1. Gore won. There is no question that Gore won the popular vote. It was our outdated (and I question whether it was ever in date) Electoral College for the highly improbably but all-too-real situation where the candidate who came in second might actually win.
2. Gore won. The Supreme Court cut off recounts at a very convenient time for the son of the man who put several of them there. So much for the balance of powers.
3. Voter disefranchisement. African Americans were presented with many obstacles to voting, as has been well-documented in Florida in 2000, and in Ohio in 2004. As much as I'd personally like to think they were there to vote for Nader, the fact is, they overwhelmingly supported Gore (Kerry). And I'll just mention the difficulties people had with the ballots in passing. All these are, of course, merely emblematic of systemic problems in all 50 states, plus our assorted territories.
4. Gore lost Florida fair and square. 4a. There were a string of other third parties on the ballot, mostly on the left, who presumably "took votes from Gore." Can you name them? Did you know they added up to more than 534 votes? 4b. Vastly more registered Democrats voted for Bush than total people voted for Nader. Reread that sentence as many times as it takes. 4c. There is no -- I want to make this very clear -- no reason to presume had Nader not been on the ballot in 2000, his would-be voters would hae automatically gone to Gore. That's sheer arrogance. A handful would have, yes, but a lot would have gone to other leftist parties, a number would have gone Libertarian, and an awful lot would have abstained. Notice: please do not respond merely to the word "handful" outside the larger context of this message. Thank you.
5. Gore lost Tennessee and Arkansas. His own home state. Clinton's home state. 'Nuff said.
Photons are affected by gravity (they follow the curvature of space caused by massive objects). But, they don't "cause" gravity, because they do not attract other objects. My understanding is that gravity is relational, which is to say, objects exert a "pull" on each other proportional to their mass. So... how can photons be pulled without also pulling? (I'm going on the assumption their pull is exactly zero, and not just infitessimally small.)
Follow-up: does this have to do with the curvature of space being a mental model, and not a literal fact?
I understand this when it comes to stars and planets. What I don't understand about the curvature of space is how it makes my pencil roll off my desk and fall on the floor.
And if you can't ask this on Slashdot, where can you ask it?
...could I get your boss to talk to my boss? I spend my free time in Scribus, Inkscape, and occasionally the GIMP, and my work time when the boss isn't looking, but I still have to do "real work" in InDesign. Not because I can't meet my objectives, but because no one else would be able to continue my work if I were to vanish off the face of the earth. The fact that the other folks in my office have little to no idea how I do my work (either way) does not enter in to the equation. Nor does the fact that I get more done in less time using OSS. Nor do financial considerations. Nor do open file formats.
We use what everyone else uses, because everyone else uses it. I can only assume everyone else uses it because we use it.
The ship is sailing merrily along, when the sailors rescue a man floating on a piece of driftwood. He tells them he's fleeing an island where dreams come true. The sailors want to set a course for this island immediately. "Not daydreams," he tells them, "real dreams!"
The sailors quickly decide they don't want to go there after all.
There's a goldmine out their awaiting some entrepreneur who could really take pride in writing good software of this sort, and though I love Linux, I don't really care what it runs on top of. I just got a job at a very good clinic (not in IT, but that's another story), and I must say, they are good in spite of their computers. Case in point: I have four computer logins, and two phone logins. All without getting up from my chair. More to the point, after looking at this stuff for six weeks, I keep thinking, "OK, this is pretty sophisticated, but it's still just a front end to a database. It could be a LOT better if there had been an information architect in the building when they put it together."
Seriously, someone help me out and point out the flaw in my thinking: if all they need is a database front-end, they should be able to make the entire thing browser-based. You log in, and the user-appropriate boxes appear automagically, a la a hundred different CMSs out there. Right? Right? I mean, you could even dumb it down to where it works in IE6...
I was the Twentysomething Whiz Kid when I was, er, in my twenties. Then I went to grad school, and got a grasp on just how much there was left to learn. I've learned some humility, but even so, the computers at one of my jobs are so-so, and an absolute catastrophe at the other. The difference is that now I have an MSI, so I can articulate why they're a catastrophe.
This has been happening since as far back as you might want to look. Reviews, and really anything news-y, says as much about the speaker as about the subject matter. Go ahead, look at reporting on politics, war, cars, computers, music, art, even the weather.
There is no objective reporting. You can only report your understanding, and while you can be well-informed and well-rounded, you can't avoid subjectivity entirely. (Don't tell Ayn Rand!) The best you can do is be up-front about where you're coming from and let folks take that into account.
Slashdot Mirror
After much thought, I've stopped believing in stupidity. We are all born knowing effectively nothing at all, and have to accumulate knowledge a little at a time. The learning curve flattens out sooner for some than for others. Barring some biochemical limitation (as in your example), I think this is determined at least as much by motivation as by capacity. Therefore, we shouldn't think of people as stupid, but incurious.
Isn't order boarding a form of torture?
Or am I confusing that with something else?
'Being too intelligent can be a sort of curse'
I should have such problems!
Well, that was certainly a good move.
... let me point out several things you appear to have overlooked.
1. Gore won. There is no question that Gore won the popular vote. It was our outdated (and I question whether it was ever in date) Electoral College for the highly improbably but all-too-real situation where the candidate who came in second might actually win.
2. Gore won. The Supreme Court cut off recounts at a very convenient time for the son of the man who put several of them there. So much for the balance of powers.
3. Voter disefranchisement. African Americans were presented with many obstacles to voting, as has been well-documented in Florida in 2000, and in Ohio in 2004. As much as I'd personally like to think they were there to vote for Nader, the fact is, they overwhelmingly supported Gore (Kerry). And I'll just mention the difficulties people had with the ballots in passing. All these are, of course, merely emblematic of systemic problems in all 50 states, plus our assorted territories.
4. Gore lost Florida fair and square.
4a. There were a string of other third parties on the ballot, mostly on the left, who presumably "took votes from Gore." Can you name them? Did you know they added up to more than 534 votes?
4b. Vastly more registered Democrats voted for Bush than total people voted for Nader. Reread that sentence as many times as it takes.
4c. There is no -- I want to make this very clear -- no reason to presume had Nader not been on the ballot in 2000, his would-be voters would hae automatically gone to Gore. That's sheer arrogance. A handful would have, yes, but a lot would have gone to other leftist parties, a number would have gone Libertarian, and an awful lot would have abstained. Notice: please do not respond merely to the word "handful" outside the larger context of this message. Thank you.
5. Gore lost Tennessee and Arkansas. His own home state. Clinton's home state. 'Nuff said.
OK, serious physics question to follow up.
Photons are affected by gravity (they follow the curvature of space caused by massive objects). But, they don't "cause" gravity, because they do not attract other objects. My understanding is that gravity is relational, which is to say, objects exert a "pull" on each other proportional to their mass. So... how can photons be pulled without also pulling? (I'm going on the assumption their pull is exactly zero, and not just infitessimally small.)
Follow-up: does this have to do with the curvature of space being a mental model, and not a literal fact?
I understand this when it comes to stars and planets. What I don't understand about the curvature of space is how it makes my pencil roll off my desk and fall on the floor.
And if you can't ask this on Slashdot, where can you ask it?
A simile is like an analogy. Either could be compared to a metaphor.
...could I get your boss to talk to my boss? I spend my free time in Scribus, Inkscape, and occasionally the GIMP, and my work time when the boss isn't looking, but I still have to do "real work" in InDesign. Not because I can't meet my objectives, but because no one else would be able to continue my work if I were to vanish off the face of the earth. The fact that the other folks in my office have little to no idea how I do my work (either way) does not enter in to the equation. Nor does the fact that I get more done in less time using OSS. Nor do financial considerations. Nor do open file formats.
We use what everyone else uses, because everyone else uses it. I can only assume everyone else uses it because we use it.
And if it works out there in Cuba, maybe we could try it here in the USA, as well.
The ship is sailing merrily along, when the sailors rescue a man floating on a piece of driftwood. He tells them he's fleeing an island where dreams come true. The sailors want to set a course for this island immediately. "Not daydreams," he tells them, "real dreams!"
The sailors quickly decide they don't want to go there after all.
I never thought there would be a day when XP would be considered a step up from the current state of affairs.
Then again, these days, Nixon would be considered a step up from the current state of affairs, so...
...it's time to resurrect the term "IBM compatible?"
Seriously, this phrase is a throwback and an oversimplification, but it has built-in acceptance among a certain age bracket.
I consider anyone still using Microsoft, and OOXML in particular, to be making a major oversight.
Of course, among people I know, that's almost as many now as it ever was. *Sigh...*
That should be...
Todos sus bases son nos pertenecen.
And yes, that is the correct, incorrect, Spanish. I am a professional. Do not try this at home.
No, they meant it that way. As in, "Is open source proof of a recession?"
...for another name change? It's been what, almost four years, now?
...without the appropriate movie reference!
Seriously, someone help me out and point out the flaw in my thinking: if all they need is a database front-end, they should be able to make the entire thing browser-based. You log in, and the user-appropriate boxes appear automagically, a la a hundred different CMSs out there. Right? Right? I mean, you could even dumb it down to where it works in IE6...
I was the Twentysomething Whiz Kid when I was, er, in my twenties. Then I went to grad school, and got a grasp on just how much there was left to learn. I've learned some humility, but even so, the computers at one of my jobs are so-so, and an absolute catastrophe at the other. The difference is that now I have an MSI, so I can articulate why they're a catastrophe.
This has been happening since as far back as you might want to look. Reviews, and really anything news-y, says as much about the speaker as about the subject matter. Go ahead, look at reporting on politics, war, cars, computers, music, art, even the weather.
There is no objective reporting. You can only report your understanding, and while you can be well-informed and well-rounded, you can't avoid subjectivity entirely. (Don't tell Ayn Rand!) The best you can do is be up-front about where you're coming from and let folks take that into account.
Before the television it was harder for the uneducated or misinformed to get an audience.
Damn television! Road Runner cartoons caused me to fail my first semester of high school physics.
Judge Kimball is a "Linux-mob?"
...Ubuntu is looking better all the time. On seven machines over three years, it's crashed once on me. And I'm pretty sure that was a hardware thing.
Did you mean the geopolitical kind, or the comic book kind?