no.
Just no.
http://www.cancer.gov/research...
There just isn't a rise in cancer since cell phones began. Yes, I guess those ones on the moon landing modules powered by plutonium reactors are cancer causing, but for those cell phones that are in use enough to matter, there isn't a corresponding rise in cancer.
Literally the data are better to suggest cell phones LOWER cancer.
Cell phone radiation unquestionably was not a factor before 1975, and unquestionably it is rising. My father was at a medical resident's conference in 1950 when they were amazed at this new cancer in a place that wasn't expected to be able to have cancer...lung cancer (everyone was smoking during the conference) and nobody had an idea why there could be all this cancer.
I had a residents conference in 1980 when we were finding melanoma in children for the first time. Nobody had much doubt it was because of more sun exposure and more severe sun exposure.
There isn't a rise in brain cancer like there were in lung and skin.
http://seer.cancer.gov/statfac...http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...http://www.cancer.gov/research...
Yeah, obviously, the amount of work involved in making a simulation able to have visible quantum effects is about the same as making a whole new universe. BUT, the aliens/robots/evil spirits that have us in a simulation are, indeed, a cgi simulation and we've all seen the movies they are in. The other point is that if you were to believe in the universe-as-simulation crap, you'd have to also allow the possibility of an infinite regress of the aliens deceiving us also being in a simulation, the robots deceiving teh aliens deceiving us also being deceived by Decartes Evil Daemon and the Evil Daemon deceiving the robots deceiving the aliens deceiving us are in turn deceived by the turtles.
The turtles told me this, and that after them, it's turtles all the way down.
The medial-basal brain functions to respond rapidly. The Striatum connects reward and emotion centers to immediate action centers and as such produces 'salience'. Activation of this area has emotional content. Duh. Drugs of abuse activate it. Duh. You know what else activates it? Responding to stress activates it. So, procrastination and then working really hard at the last possible time frame. Having lots of drama in a disrupted life. These all activate the same centers of the brain as drugs of abuse. but if you get work done, it is doubly reinforced.
I'm not sure of ANY public health measures where the context matters. Do we care about drunk driving when we require seat belts? We do care about it when we make passive restraints, but again, the context doesn't matter except to say better protective devices work on ALL contexts. And these particular laws are likely to be effective especially BECAUSE they are the most context INDEPENDENT.
The curve of the relationship between gun availability and homicide rates among different US states gives an S shaped, NOT a linear curve. This is similar to a bimolecular curve. Both the guns and the people using them are needed for violence, but while this curve implies a LOT of guns have to be removed to get a 50% reduction of violence, it also implies removing the people involved Or Their Access To Guns would work much better.
The laws make sense in this context.
This is so veddy veddy British. They think they actually can decide for the world about encryption. I'm a not-very-good script kiddie and I sorta-kinda knew how to do (some) of the many methods outlined here. Anyone who wants can just encrypt whatever they want and mostly it's not at all breakable and the amount of effort if even 1% of internet traffic is encrypted by different ways becomes prohibitively tedious to do anything about.
Fat people eat on the basis of cues not internal hunger. You lose the normal cues to overeat when you eat a new diet and if it satisfies some psychological effect, you feel full while not eating so many calories (if you are fat and your normal cues are really messed up).
http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/...
and.... is there anything (ok, sex, dope, being proved right) that is more satisfying than chocolate?
https://www.psychologytoday.co...
so, it would work very temporarily.
He smashed a young, innocent hard drive that was no harm to anyone !
Is there no end to his evil ?!?
To think of the future that hard drive could have had...... the first novel, the first porn download, the first person shooter......
uh.... nevermind
And nobody is making it illegal nor very difficult to make an entirely fake online persona.
Personally, most jobs I have had require a certain amount of social IQ*, this is a marker for people lacking that skill set. If my employees are either total party-tards or unable to put up a professional artificial front, they are really dangerous to me and my business.
*LYING.
The real question, obviously is, how do you deal with the apes ?
Yeah people are stupid.... nearly half don't believe in evolution, there is no stupid Republican lie that doesn't fool at least 20% of the public (birthers, death panels, Obama is a socialist...when everyone knows he's really a Vulcan...., etc.)
Ok, I can answer this one. I'm a physician. I HAVE to deal with people who cannot reliably count to three. This is a huge problem facing health care:
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/limited%20health%20literacy.html
You fit things into how their brains work. Paradigms. Paradigms that they know....(i.e., metaphor). Draw pictures to illustrate causality chains.
(oh, by the way, the term nerdpocalypse.net means this sort of cognitive visual framework).
And, if I'm trying to get YOU GUYS to start using primary source data, and multiple references and facility with enormous data sets....it's becomes the same problems I have with the low health literacy patients.
dude, all we do is war with each other....
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/news.html
no, not anything like a complete listing... just took the first 15 things that ran through me head in like a minute......
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/chaotic%20systems.html
wow, like 'interaction of elements', 'not continuous', dependence on initial conditions
hell, you'd think they'd at least have googled 'catastrophe theory' (a subset of chaos--sorry, we prefer the term 'dynamic systems' or 'dynamic simulations'
It really is very well established.
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/climate.html
There's oodles of supporting data. The deny'ers are not very credible. Frankly, you can see a lot of evidence outside my window.
personally, I'm rather for reforestation, soil reclaimation as solution (which should have broad support), and I see carbon sequestration as a bit of a scam
Slashdot Mirror
no. Just no. http://www.cancer.gov/research... There just isn't a rise in cancer since cell phones began. Yes, I guess those ones on the moon landing modules powered by plutonium reactors are cancer causing, but for those cell phones that are in use enough to matter, there isn't a corresponding rise in cancer. Literally the data are better to suggest cell phones LOWER cancer.
Cell phone radiation unquestionably was not a factor before 1975, and unquestionably it is rising. My father was at a medical resident's conference in 1950 when they were amazed at this new cancer in a place that wasn't expected to be able to have cancer...lung cancer (everyone was smoking during the conference) and nobody had an idea why there could be all this cancer. I had a residents conference in 1980 when we were finding melanoma in children for the first time. Nobody had much doubt it was because of more sun exposure and more severe sun exposure. There isn't a rise in brain cancer like there were in lung and skin. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfac... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm... http://www.cancer.gov/research...
Yeah, obviously, the amount of work involved in making a simulation able to have visible quantum effects is about the same as making a whole new universe. BUT, the aliens/robots/evil spirits that have us in a simulation are, indeed, a cgi simulation and we've all seen the movies they are in. The other point is that if you were to believe in the universe-as-simulation crap, you'd have to also allow the possibility of an infinite regress of the aliens deceiving us also being in a simulation, the robots deceiving teh aliens deceiving us also being deceived by Decartes Evil Daemon and the Evil Daemon deceiving the robots deceiving the aliens deceiving us are in turn deceived by the turtles. The turtles told me this, and that after them, it's turtles all the way down.
The medial-basal brain functions to respond rapidly. The Striatum connects reward and emotion centers to immediate action centers and as such produces 'salience'. Activation of this area has emotional content. Duh. Drugs of abuse activate it. Duh. You know what else activates it? Responding to stress activates it. So, procrastination and then working really hard at the last possible time frame. Having lots of drama in a disrupted life. These all activate the same centers of the brain as drugs of abuse. but if you get work done, it is doubly reinforced.
I'm not sure of ANY public health measures where the context matters. Do we care about drunk driving when we require seat belts? We do care about it when we make passive restraints, but again, the context doesn't matter except to say better protective devices work on ALL contexts. And these particular laws are likely to be effective especially BECAUSE they are the most context INDEPENDENT.
The curve of the relationship between gun availability and homicide rates among different US states gives an S shaped, NOT a linear curve. This is similar to a bimolecular curve. Both the guns and the people using them are needed for violence, but while this curve implies a LOT of guns have to be removed to get a 50% reduction of violence, it also implies removing the people involved Or Their Access To Guns would work much better. The laws make sense in this context.
This is so veddy veddy British. They think they actually can decide for the world about encryption. I'm a not-very-good script kiddie and I sorta-kinda knew how to do (some) of the many methods outlined here. Anyone who wants can just encrypt whatever they want and mostly it's not at all breakable and the amount of effort if even 1% of internet traffic is encrypted by different ways becomes prohibitively tedious to do anything about.
Fat people eat on the basis of cues not internal hunger. You lose the normal cues to overeat when you eat a new diet and if it satisfies some psychological effect, you feel full while not eating so many calories (if you are fat and your normal cues are really messed up). http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/... and.... is there anything (ok, sex, dope, being proved right) that is more satisfying than chocolate? https://www.psychologytoday.co... so, it would work very temporarily.
He smashed a young, innocent hard drive that was no harm to anyone ! Is there no end to his evil ?!? To think of the future that hard drive could have had...... the first novel, the first porn download, the first person shooter...... uh.... nevermind
And nobody is making it illegal nor very difficult to make an entirely fake online persona. Personally, most jobs I have had require a certain amount of social IQ*, this is a marker for people lacking that skill set. If my employees are either total party-tards or unable to put up a professional artificial front, they are really dangerous to me and my business. *LYING.
The real question, obviously is, how do you deal with the apes ? Yeah people are stupid.... nearly half don't believe in evolution, there is no stupid Republican lie that doesn't fool at least 20% of the public (birthers, death panels, Obama is a socialist...when everyone knows he's really a Vulcan...., etc.) Ok, I can answer this one. I'm a physician. I HAVE to deal with people who cannot reliably count to three. This is a huge problem facing health care: http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/limited%20health%20literacy.html You fit things into how their brains work. Paradigms. Paradigms that they know....(i.e., metaphor). Draw pictures to illustrate causality chains. (oh, by the way, the term nerdpocalypse.net means this sort of cognitive visual framework). And, if I'm trying to get YOU GUYS to start using primary source data, and multiple references and facility with enormous data sets....it's becomes the same problems I have with the low health literacy patients.
and they've found evidence of a deep water drilling that seems to have occurred about the time when the water started decreasing......
dude, all we do is war with each other.... http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/news.html no, not anything like a complete listing... just took the first 15 things that ran through me head in like a minute......
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/chaotic%20systems.html wow, like 'interaction of elements', 'not continuous', dependence on initial conditions hell, you'd think they'd at least have googled 'catastrophe theory' (a subset of chaos--sorry, we prefer the term 'dynamic systems' or 'dynamic simulations'
It really is very well established. http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/climate.html There's oodles of supporting data. The deny'ers are not very credible. Frankly, you can see a lot of evidence outside my window. personally, I'm rather for reforestation, soil reclaimation as solution (which should have broad support), and I see carbon sequestration as a bit of a scam