I agree. In fact, the samples I saw looked like you could just take one frame and you'd have an easy to decode captcha, since each individual frame was far simpler than some of the advanced captchas I've seen around.
These would only be more difficult if you actually change the content over time. From what I've seen, they don't, they merely scroll the words across the screen.
They don't even apply time-varying noise to it, which I don't understand at all. The human visual system is really good at using temporal clues to "see through" noise. They don't seem to take advantage of that at all.
Cops doesn't hesitate to fire lethal weapons at a violent protester.
Uhh, yeah they do. If cops fired lethal weapons into crowds whenever there was a rock thrown at them, there would be many more casualties in protest situations. Non-lethal weapons were designed and are used specifically for stopping violent protesters without having to use lethal force.
I'm not saying use of non-lethal weapons isn't abused, but come on. Very few (if any) cops want to be the guy who shot his sidearm into a crowd of protesters. Even if they don't wind up being prosecuted, it would make their life very shitty for a while.
Exercise accomplishes much the same thing. Just work out for 45 minutes when you get home, and by the time you're done, you've forgotten all about work.
If you do that, what's the meaningful difference between "will" and "free will?"
That's kind of the point. There is no distinction, since will is what the mind chooses to do... and the mind is free to choose to do whatsoever it wants. There is no external "force" controlling it. That's my chief concern with saying that free will doesn't exist, because that seems to imply that there is some external power "controlling" actions. This is obviously nonsense as well. Our choices are not predetermined.
"the ability to make decisions which is not a direct product of causality"
But see you're defining free-will in a hocus-pocus magic way. Your definition makes it so that it cannot exist, since you're also assuming a deterministic universe. I think, instead, one should define free will as the "ability of the conscious mind to make decisions".
Anyways, I believe the self is what is the illusion, so I think one must define free-will in terms which are compatible with such an idea.
Stop repeating things without fully understanding them. Making broad statements such as "free-will doesn't exist" is completely irresponsible, since it has in no way been proven experimentally. If one defines free will as "the ability of the conscious mind to make long term plans and see them to fruition", then neuroscience has, as of yet, nothing concrete to say on the subject.
Yes, but I imagine that sober teenagers also account for a higher than average accident rate. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the rate was three times higher than average.
Fact of the matter is, teenagers are poor drivers, both drunk and sober.
Neither photons nor electrons travel near C in a cable, they travel around 0.6C-0.7C
Not to be pedantic, but electrons do not travel anywhere near "0.6C-0.7C" in a cable. The signal may propagate (outside of the cable) at that velocity, but the electrons themselves move much much slower.
Well, the cable would have to be very very light per unit length for this to work in the first place, so I imagine the terminal velocity of the falling cable would be very low. Still a lot of cable, but I imagine it would come down quite slowly.
Try not to forget that most of Europe was rubble in 1945. A good portion of the second half of the 20th century was spent building houses and infrastructure that had been obliterated by American, German, and Soviet bombs. It's only natural that they had to play catch-up in many aspects of technology. That has come to an end now, with Europe at or exceeding American levels in most areas of research & technology.
Even some of us who have never downloaded anything illegal have to sanitize our own telephones. Fortunately though, as a general rule, our shit don't stank.
We have this in Germany. There are signal lights between intersections which tell you what speed you should go to correctly hit the next light. When I first got here I tended to ignore them, until I discovered they actually work very well. The speed limit might be 60, but if the light says 40, you might as well slow down, or you'll just be braking later.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing out. It was a pretty good movie.
These would only be more difficult if you actually change the content over time. From what I've seen, they don't, they merely scroll the words across the screen.
They don't even apply time-varying noise to it, which I don't understand at all. The human visual system is really good at using temporal clues to "see through" noise. They don't seem to take advantage of that at all.
Cops doesn't hesitate to fire lethal weapons at a violent protester.
Uhh, yeah they do. If cops fired lethal weapons into crowds whenever there was a rock thrown at them, there would be many more casualties in protest situations. Non-lethal weapons were designed and are used specifically for stopping violent protesters without having to use lethal force.
I'm not saying use of non-lethal weapons isn't abused, but come on. Very few (if any) cops want to be the guy who shot his sidearm into a crowd of protesters. Even if they don't wind up being prosecuted, it would make their life very shitty for a while.
Didn't he also kind of screw the pooch on the whole D-Day thing?
With this move, Mercedes-Benz earns the distinction of being the first carmaker to integrate Apple technology into its vehicles' in-car systems."
My 2009 G37 has an iphone/ipod dock and navigator integrated into the dashboard-screen gps.
I didn't know there was a difference between a PR firm and a "propaganda" firm.
Yes, but then Capitalism is the slave-master, not Foxconn.
I like how you state that Alladin was "basically a thief" but don't mention how Robin Hood was exactly a thief.
Exercise accomplishes much the same thing. Just work out for 45 minutes when you get home, and by the time you're done, you've forgotten all about work.
If you do that, what's the meaningful difference between "will" and "free will?"
That's kind of the point. There is no distinction, since will is what the mind chooses to do... and the mind is free to choose to do whatsoever it wants. There is no external "force" controlling it. That's my chief concern with saying that free will doesn't exist, because that seems to imply that there is some external power "controlling" actions. This is obviously nonsense as well. Our choices are not predetermined.
"the ability to make decisions which is not a direct product of causality"
But see you're defining free-will in a hocus-pocus magic way. Your definition makes it so that it cannot exist, since you're also assuming a deterministic universe. I think, instead, one should define free will as the "ability of the conscious mind to make decisions".
Anyways, I believe the self is what is the illusion, so I think one must define free-will in terms which are compatible with such an idea.
Stop repeating things without fully understanding them. Making broad statements such as "free-will doesn't exist" is completely irresponsible, since it has in no way been proven experimentally. If one defines free will as "the ability of the conscious mind to make long term plans and see them to fruition", then neuroscience has, as of yet, nothing concrete to say on the subject.
There are aircraft that have been flying for 46 years.
Also, your reaction mass doesn't need to be that large as long as your exhaust velocity is sufficiently high.
Nah, I bet there were at least a few cases of sober person rear-ending drunk person.
Fact of the matter is, teenagers are poor drivers, both drunk and sober.
Neither photons nor electrons travel near C in a cable, they travel around 0.6C-0.7C
Not to be pedantic, but electrons do not travel anywhere near "0.6C-0.7C" in a cable. The signal may propagate (outside of the cable) at that velocity, but the electrons themselves move much much slower.
I'm saying you're vastly oversimplifying the problem.
Would the mass change from losing 0.x% off the bottom really be enough to let the counter-weight pull the whole thing away from the planet?
I'd imagine that it would slowly start pulling away, yes. At what rate, hell if I know.
Well, the cable would have to be very very light per unit length for this to work in the first place, so I imagine the terminal velocity of the falling cable would be very low. Still a lot of cable, but I imagine it would come down quite slowly.
The problem is making the beanstalk strong and light enough.
Yes, just like the problem with getting to other stars is "going fast enough".
It isn't used in common parlance because it's easier to convert kilometers to libraries of congresses.
Try not to forget that most of Europe was rubble in 1945. A good portion of the second half of the 20th century was spent building houses and infrastructure that had been obliterated by American, German, and Soviet bombs. It's only natural that they had to play catch-up in many aspects of technology. That has come to an end now, with Europe at or exceeding American levels in most areas of research & technology.
Even some of us who have never downloaded anything illegal have to sanitize our own telephones. Fortunately though, as a general rule, our shit don't stank.
We have this in Germany. There are signal lights between intersections which tell you what speed you should go to correctly hit the next light. When I first got here I tended to ignore them, until I discovered they actually work very well. The speed limit might be 60, but if the light says 40, you might as well slow down, or you'll just be braking later.