I wonder if she did a Frequentist or a Bayesian calculation from the test statistic. If she did do the latter, her hypothesis would've been "People are smarter when they have to pee". She would have needed a prior on that hypothesis. Experience across a spectrum of human interaction dictates that any hypothesis starting with "People are smart", would have an extremely narrow Lorentzian prior centered around 0.0000000001.
Talk about utterly pointless technology. If I post a smiley from this keyboard on to Facebook, will the comment have a tag underneath it saying "via Emoticon Keyboard"?
I suppose by now any wanna-be authoritarian would realize that it's probably not the greatest idea. As Doug Stanhope says, "If that's the only thing that gets you through your day, fine. Do it. Keep me out of it."
Rise, Egypt. I'm with you. Whatever dog-shit that counts for.
Being called geeks/nerds is the result of America's obsessive compulsive need to label and tag each and everything, every action and every person if they remotely exhibit certain commonly shared characteristics. If you ride a bike, you must follow the biker culture. If you go to grad school, you must know what Star Trek is all about.
If I buy Promised Land milk, it's not because I'm making a strong religious statement. It's not because I'm contemplating embracing Jesus and the Christian way. It's because it fucking tastes good.
US is losing a lot more than its edge in innovation by ostracizing "geeks" and "nerds". The sad part is, there won't be enough of the geeks and nerds left to predict what US will end up losing.
Oh come now, we need all the hype to keep our unsatisfactory, unhappy, dull and routine days mildly entertaining. Media sensationalism is the new opiate of the masses. How dare a research study take that away from us, by blatantly stating facts?!
Be more creative Anonymous. If you don't want to be ridiculed as 12 years old hackers who know nothing other than DDoS attacks, that is.
Take the example of Pirate Party, Sweden. Political presence requires you to be sincere about your ways.
Next thing you know when the Republicans come in power, they ban you from reading Slashdot. Why? "Because it sounds a lot like this progressive liberal tech-loving hippy unpatriotic atheist crap".
Actually, I don't mind them doing this. In their desperation, they've just walked out of their Mom's basement without their pants on, with a picket-poster in hand saying "goobbly-booh". I feel so happy when idiots get frustrated and start flapping around helplessly. The societal equivalent of natural selection will take care of them.
Oh and, I am going to start replacing all my insulting curse-words (e.g., douchebag) with "RIAA".
Looking at everything that's going on in this thread, it goes to show that it's going to be excruciatingly difficult to able to get out of the cesspool of history. Harmless stereotypical jokes aside, it seems people are not going to take each other seriously unless they look/talk the same and come from a "familiar" land. Let alone build space tech together.
Welp, it's at the least going to be interesting to see how far we go like this until the next blatant colonization effort.
Who is talking about outsourcing tech jobs? RTFA, it's PARTNERSHIP. This stereotype is not amusing anymore.
In any case, given India's recent achievements in space tech, your mistrust in ISRO's abilities stands to question.
And if you are implying that India is the ONLY religion-riddled caste-discriminating nepotistic country, then I don't know where you've been getting your news from lately.
Dealing with one person from IIRS (mind you, that's NOT the place that builds the remote sensors, it's an educational institute), you can NOT possibly build an opinion about the whole organization. To build a sensible statistic AND make claims, you need a sample space. Not just one sample.
I'm not really for this e-book switch, but for different reasons.
"Abuse" is possible in the current text system, as well. But in a more subtle, unobjectionable way. Professors still have preferred texts of their own, a lot of them written by the professors themselves or their close colleagues. The whole course structure, the homework problems and the tests follow closely the textbook. Even if you wanted to refer to something else, in principle, it will definitely give you more breadth of knowledge. But it will not get you the grades you need. You will have to go for the preferred text.
I agree, that in this case anyone can write an ebook and make it the mandatory requirement. But for something to be used as the main reference in a university course, it still needs to go through some layers of peer review and critique. So the advent of e-books might bring in unsupervised material, it still doesn't worsen the problem than it already is.
once again, look at our sampling "space". just a single point in a practically infinite dimensional space of different parameters. we can't build a statistic based on that and say these are the only conditions under which life evolves. yeah sure, maybe our kind of life.
i do realize we have no baseline other than ours to say anything about ET life. But that's more than motivation for us to work on other more direct approaches to figure out existence of life on planets. Evolved lifeforms will tend to leave a significant impression on the planet's environment. Then maybe instead of just speculating based on the chemical composition of the surface and the atmosphere, e.g. we can measure "disturbances" that are there due to presence of life.
Easier said than done, but can be done. We are good at dynamical systems, this poses an interesting problem to solve. More research funding, better life on Earth at the least.
Just 20 light years away is good news!
One thing that always bothers me when I read about E.T. life, is the fact that we get excited when we find water or an Earth-like atmosphere somewhere, thinking there should/might be life there. We should factor in the possibility that life may evolve entirely differently from us, without requiring water or nitrogen/oxygen. In that case though, we can't really know how it will have evolved as we have no reference of evolution other than ours. So let's wait, or just go there as soon as we can as aliens.
One can always be aware of the fact that they're choosing history-based biased news stories, and not "general" stories (whatever that means). If you are aware of the fact that eventually you're going to end up reading about the same things everyday, and i stress IF you are aware, I don't think there's a problem with personalization. If you want variety, you can always search for it.
We just get lazy after a point and fit into the comfort zone of reading about the things we see as more pertinent. It's not so much the fault of the news provider that you don't read varied stories, it's your history; it speaks for itself. So i second you, we like doing less work. But we'd rather not acknowledge that and blame the source of giving us the same ol' bullshit all the time. It's convenient.
I suppose one could consider what Lady Gaga was doing while feeding her pony as "news" by the strictest definition of the word. If presented with a billion news stories to choose from, I'm pretty sure according to the statistics of Gaussian distribution, people at large will end up going for all of them. If someone wants to step on in the shit, knowing it's shit, I don't see a problem with it.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if she did a Frequentist or a Bayesian calculation from the test statistic. If she did do the latter, her hypothesis would've been "People are smarter when they have to pee". She would have needed a prior on that hypothesis. Experience across a spectrum of human interaction dictates that any hypothesis starting with "People are smart", would have an extremely narrow Lorentzian prior centered around 0.0000000001.
What we need is a webcam that reads your face expression and translates it into an emoticon
I doubt anyone is really rolling on the floor laughing, when they claim so online. :-|
The webcam-emoticon reader's most common output would be
Talk about utterly pointless technology. If I post a smiley from this keyboard on to Facebook, will the comment have a tag underneath it saying "via Emoticon Keyboard"?
I suppose by now any wanna-be authoritarian would realize that it's probably not the greatest idea. As Doug Stanhope says, "If that's the only thing that gets you through your day, fine. Do it. Keep me out of it."
Rise, Egypt. I'm with you. Whatever dog-shit that counts for.
Being called geeks/nerds is the result of America's obsessive compulsive need to label and tag each and everything, every action and every person if they remotely exhibit certain commonly shared characteristics. If you ride a bike, you must follow the biker culture. If you go to grad school, you must know what Star Trek is all about.
If I buy Promised Land milk, it's not because I'm making a strong religious statement. It's not because I'm contemplating embracing Jesus and the Christian way. It's because it fucking tastes good.
US is losing a lot more than its edge in innovation by ostracizing "geeks" and "nerds". The sad part is, there won't be enough of the geeks and nerds left to predict what US will end up losing.
Oh come now, we need all the hype to keep our unsatisfactory, unhappy, dull and routine days mildly entertaining. Media sensationalism is the new opiate of the masses. How dare a research study take that away from us, by blatantly stating facts?!
Undergarments still are a "taboo" and cause people to lose their jobs if mentioned?
Be more creative Anonymous. If you don't want to be ridiculed as 12 years old hackers who know nothing other than DDoS attacks, that is. Take the example of Pirate Party, Sweden. Political presence requires you to be sincere about your ways.
Next thing you know when the Republicans come in power, they ban you from reading Slashdot. Why? "Because it sounds a lot like this progressive liberal tech-loving hippy unpatriotic atheist crap".
In Carlin's words: "It's bad for ya".
Actually, I don't mind them doing this. In their desperation, they've just walked out of their Mom's basement without their pants on, with a picket-poster in hand saying "goobbly-booh". I feel so happy when idiots get frustrated and start flapping around helplessly. The societal equivalent of natural selection will take care of them.
Oh and, I am going to start replacing all my insulting curse-words (e.g., douchebag) with "RIAA".
@SilverHatHacker
Ooh. This is Irony with a capital I.
I quote your signature: "Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose." (Hint: It's irony.)
Looking at everything that's going on in this thread, it goes to show that it's going to be excruciatingly difficult to able to get out of the cesspool of history. Harmless stereotypical jokes aside, it seems people are not going to take each other seriously unless they look/talk the same and come from a "familiar" land. Let alone build space tech together.
Welp, it's at the least going to be interesting to see how far we go like this until the next blatant colonization effort.
Who is talking about outsourcing tech jobs? RTFA, it's PARTNERSHIP. This stereotype is not amusing anymore.
In any case, given India's recent achievements in space tech, your mistrust in ISRO's abilities stands to question.
And if you are implying that India is the ONLY religion-riddled caste-discriminating nepotistic country, then I don't know where you've been getting your news from lately.
Dealing with one person from IIRS (mind you, that's NOT the place that builds the remote sensors, it's an educational institute), you can NOT possibly build an opinion about the whole organization. To build a sensible statistic AND make claims, you need a sample space. Not just one sample.
I'm not really for this e-book switch, but for different reasons. "Abuse" is possible in the current text system, as well. But in a more subtle, unobjectionable way. Professors still have preferred texts of their own, a lot of them written by the professors themselves or their close colleagues. The whole course structure, the homework problems and the tests follow closely the textbook. Even if you wanted to refer to something else, in principle, it will definitely give you more breadth of knowledge. But it will not get you the grades you need. You will have to go for the preferred text. I agree, that in this case anyone can write an ebook and make it the mandatory requirement. But for something to be used as the main reference in a university course, it still needs to go through some layers of peer review and critique. So the advent of e-books might bring in unsupervised material, it still doesn't worsen the problem than it already is.
Forced into doing something I don't like...yup, sounds like democracy all right.
A line from the article: "Of course, Hawking has become rather well known for jumping way out on a limb..."
I seem to have missed out on the news recently about Hawking. So when did he get a (cybernetic) limb that jumps way out?
once again, look at our sampling "space". just a single point in a practically infinite dimensional space of different parameters. we can't build a statistic based on that and say these are the only conditions under which life evolves. yeah sure, maybe our kind of life.
i do realize we have no baseline other than ours to say anything about ET life. But that's more than motivation for us to work on other more direct approaches to figure out existence of life on planets. Evolved lifeforms will tend to leave a significant impression on the planet's environment. Then maybe instead of just speculating based on the chemical composition of the surface and the atmosphere, e.g. we can measure "disturbances" that are there due to presence of life.
Easier said than done, but can be done. We are good at dynamical systems, this poses an interesting problem to solve. More research funding, better life on Earth at the least.
It just doesn't have that "ring." Do you have another name for it?
Just 20 light years away is good news! One thing that always bothers me when I read about E.T. life, is the fact that we get excited when we find water or an Earth-like atmosphere somewhere, thinking there should/might be life there. We should factor in the possibility that life may evolve entirely differently from us, without requiring water or nitrogen/oxygen. In that case though, we can't really know how it will have evolved as we have no reference of evolution other than ours. So let's wait, or just go there as soon as we can as aliens.
One can always be aware of the fact that they're choosing history-based biased news stories, and not "general" stories (whatever that means). If you are aware of the fact that eventually you're going to end up reading about the same things everyday, and i stress IF you are aware, I don't think there's a problem with personalization. If you want variety, you can always search for it. We just get lazy after a point and fit into the comfort zone of reading about the things we see as more pertinent. It's not so much the fault of the news provider that you don't read varied stories, it's your history; it speaks for itself. So i second you, we like doing less work. But we'd rather not acknowledge that and blame the source of giving us the same ol' bullshit all the time. It's convenient.
I suppose one could consider what Lady Gaga was doing while feeding her pony as "news" by the strictest definition of the word. If presented with a billion news stories to choose from, I'm pretty sure according to the statistics of Gaussian distribution, people at large will end up going for all of them. If someone wants to step on in the shit, knowing it's shit, I don't see a problem with it.