Because it shows it's not about "doing simulated kindness means you do real-life kindness". It's about "having simulated superpowers means you do real-life kindness". Everyone was flying - half in a helicopter and half with superpowers. The people in helicopters did not show kindness in real life, regardless of whether or not they had in VR. The people with superpowers did show kindness in real life, regardless of whether or not they had in VR.
The method of flight proved to be the important variable, not the simulated kindness.
This time I think it's less about being Friday and more about there being a lot more crazy stuff to scream about. Contraception, a suicide bombing at a US embassy, hearings over the new SecDef, and a contracting economy are all better targets for the GOP to poke Obama with than an outgoing Energy Secretary they don't really like. There'll be a few op-eds about Solyndra and climate change, but then they'll turn back to the tastier morsels.
At any rate, is I think this study is stupid. Wouldn't experiencing a VR simulation where the test subject has the opportunity to be kind to someone be sufficient stimulus? How can they distinguish between that and the experience of having superpowers?
No, because they did control for that. People flying a helicopter saving kids did not help with the pens afterwards. Meanwhile, people given superpowered flight who did not save kids were as likely to help with the pens as people given superpowered flight who did save kids.
Thanks, you stated what I was implying. My point apparently was lost on most people; I didn't realize there was such a large population here who honestly believed that all patents are bullshit.
Software is not "just math" in the same way that catapults are not just physics.
Looks like a flaw in the triggering code that allowed the other team to trigger the self-destruct could be a very costly mistake.
TFA is bugging out on my work computer, but I think "battlefield" is the wrong theater to be thinking of for this kind of stuff. The intended use should be for the diplomatic corps. At an embassy in a hostile country, you want your data to be destroyable at a moment's notice. They have superpowered incinerators ready to burn all their documents should something go wrong. This would be an extra layer of security for all their electronic data storage. And the "other team" isn't going to trigger the self-destruct, because they want to see the data, not destroy it.
A reflector on the moon isn't a sign that humans ever went there; an unmanned rover could have easily left it behind.
Remember that when you're dealing with conspiracy theorists, evidence contrary to their belief will be dismissed out of hand. But that's fine - when they hold such a minority opinion, the burden of proof is on them, not you. The only way to have them see reason is to tirelessly rebut everything they come up with until, finally, they start to realize that the true explanation might be the one that doesn't nned to invoke mind control or aliens to fill in the gaps. In the specific case of the moon landings, it comes down to proving that the tech does work, that humans can survive in space, and that so many people could keep quiet for so long if there actually were a conspiracy. If there's no reason to believe we couldn't go to the moon, there's no reason to disbelieve the people who say we did.
The coach is most certainly involved with the play-calling, which is a large chunk of what he's watching film for in the first place. But, if you like, I'll change the analogy to the players instead - players watch film of themselves all the time to see where, how, and why they screwed up.
Your point is that people can never be objective about themselves. I disagree. I believe that when confronted with objective evidence (statistics like what Wolfram's peddling), many people can indeed take an honest look at themselves. Sure, there are narcissists who will just see it as validation of their own greatness and chronic depressives who will see it as evidence of their own worthlessness, but I don't think the entire population is split between narcissists and depressed people. Rational people might not run the world, but they make up most of it. Catering to them is almost never a bad move.
And how would you do it? They have been sitting there preparing themselves for a "surgical strike" for sixty years. They have the most extensive tunnel and bunker system known to man. The entire freaking country is one massive fixed fortification. The people are raised with no sense of empathy, compassion, or feelings other than for their Dear Leader - children turn in their own mothers at the slightest hint of disloyalty.
Meanwhile, as soon as the fighting starts, the DMZ turns into a sea of fire. Seoul and Incheon, the capital and primary port for the South, both within easy gun/rocket range of the DMZ (you can bet those gun emplacements are already pre-sighted), are decimated within a day. 100,000 SK and 20,000 US troops hunker down to resume the WWI-style trench warfare that characterized the latter years of the Korean War, and nothing of value is gained. A fast amphibious force from the west could probably capture Pyongyang, given the current lack of Chinese support for NK and the fact that most of the NK forces are concentrated at the front, but then what? You'd still have the full stalemate at the most fortified military position in human history, and your quick-strike force would be left holding a town in the middle of a population so hostile it makes Iraq and Vietnam look like Kentucky.
The Chinese taught the N Koreans how to dig in. Dug in they are, culturally and militarily. There's a report floating around somewhere stating that the only possible way to reinitiate the Korean War without unacceptable losses, both military and civilian, is a first-strike with chemical weapons. Even with that, the report said it would take four times as much nerve gas as the US ever had on hand at any time.
Some tumors you just can't slice out. You can isolate them and try to prevent them from growing, but the surgery is just too dangerous.
If I were China, I'd already be backing away from them.
They already are. All this hubbub is in response to a UN vote censuring them for the December rocket launch. The vote was unanimous - China did not back them up or even abstain.
You've never wanted a tool to help you with self-reflection or self-analysis? People always wonder "what do other people think about me?" This is a tool to show you the side of yourself that other people see. Maybe you're ignoring someone without even realizing it. Maybe you're giving a creepy amount of attention to someone you shouldn't be. What are you doing well? What are you doing badly? It's nice to have these things presented as objective statistics, rather than your own subjective viewpoint.
I'll probably get flak for using a sports analogy on a geek site, but coaches watch game film of their own team just as much as they do of the opposing team. When you know your own habits, your own strengths and liabilities, it's a lot harder to be blindsided by something you didn't expect.
I know next to nothing about cameras, etc. However, I'd suggest you go look at the specs for some e-readers, if you can find them. I'd figure the design people for Amazon, B&N, or whoever else already did the homework on refresh rate, color balance, etc. to ensure readability.
The abstract mentions that this is the first time anyone's seen a GM2 reaction in mice due to an external stimulus. I'm curious - how much do we know about brain lipid levels? Are they generally static, or do they vary with age, disease, mood, diet, etc.?
Murder weapon? What murder weapon?
on
The 3D Un-Printer
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Who needs an icicle when you can just Un-Print your knife?
You donated the sequence of information that is the inherent root of your entire unique identity...and you're mad that someone used it to discover your identity?
Slashdot Mirror
Because it shows it's not about "doing simulated kindness means you do real-life kindness". It's about "having simulated superpowers means you do real-life kindness". Everyone was flying - half in a helicopter and half with superpowers. The people in helicopters did not show kindness in real life, regardless of whether or not they had in VR. The people with superpowers did show kindness in real life, regardless of whether or not they had in VR.
The method of flight proved to be the important variable, not the simulated kindness.
This time I think it's less about being Friday and more about there being a lot more crazy stuff to scream about. Contraception, a suicide bombing at a US embassy, hearings over the new SecDef, and a contracting economy are all better targets for the GOP to poke Obama with than an outgoing Energy Secretary they don't really like. There'll be a few op-eds about Solyndra and climate change, but then they'll turn back to the tastier morsels.
At any rate, is I think this study is stupid. Wouldn't experiencing a VR simulation where the test subject has the opportunity to be kind to someone be sufficient stimulus? How can they distinguish between that and the experience of having superpowers?
No, because they did control for that. People flying a helicopter saving kids did not help with the pens afterwards. Meanwhile, people given superpowered flight who did not save kids were as likely to help with the pens as people given superpowered flight who did save kids.
Wouldn't giving a sociopath simulated superpowers just turn him into a supervillain though? Forget the pens, he'd smash the coffee-maker!
Well, of course. Wouldn't everyone here like to see "Making Wireless Carriers Play Together [With Chainsaws]"?
You don't get to make another Slashdot submission to say "and another thing!" just because nobody liked your first one.
Software is not "just math" in the same way that catapults are not just physics.
Is physics patentable? I mean, my new catapult design is just physics.
All right, according to the gas chromatograph, the missing oil compound is... love!? Who's been screwing with this thing?
I've never understood why english titles capitalize every word either.
Well, not every word.
The best way to avoid a fight with someone is to be friends with them. The first step in becoming friends with someone is actually meeting them.
Competition between international businesses is much preferable to war between nations.
Looks like a flaw in the triggering code that allowed the other team to trigger the self-destruct could be a very costly mistake.
TFA is bugging out on my work computer, but I think "battlefield" is the wrong theater to be thinking of for this kind of stuff. The intended use should be for the diplomatic corps. At an embassy in a hostile country, you want your data to be destroyable at a moment's notice. They have superpowered incinerators ready to burn all their documents should something go wrong. This would be an extra layer of security for all their electronic data storage. And the "other team" isn't going to trigger the self-destruct, because they want to see the data, not destroy it.
The ammo box was a viable option at some point in our history. I don't know when it stopped being so, but it definitely isn't now.
I'd say it was sometime around April 9, 1865.
A reflector on the moon isn't a sign that humans ever went there; an unmanned rover could have easily left it behind.
Remember that when you're dealing with conspiracy theorists, evidence contrary to their belief will be dismissed out of hand. But that's fine - when they hold such a minority opinion, the burden of proof is on them, not you. The only way to have them see reason is to tirelessly rebut everything they come up with until, finally, they start to realize that the true explanation might be the one that doesn't nned to invoke mind control or aliens to fill in the gaps. In the specific case of the moon landings, it comes down to proving that the tech does work, that humans can survive in space, and that so many people could keep quiet for so long if there actually were a conspiracy. If there's no reason to believe we couldn't go to the moon, there's no reason to disbelieve the people who say we did.
The coach is most certainly involved with the play-calling, which is a large chunk of what he's watching film for in the first place. But, if you like, I'll change the analogy to the players instead - players watch film of themselves all the time to see where, how, and why they screwed up.
Your point is that people can never be objective about themselves. I disagree. I believe that when confronted with objective evidence (statistics like what Wolfram's peddling), many people can indeed take an honest look at themselves. Sure, there are narcissists who will just see it as validation of their own greatness and chronic depressives who will see it as evidence of their own worthlessness, but I don't think the entire population is split between narcissists and depressed people. Rational people might not run the world, but they make up most of it. Catering to them is almost never a bad move.
Meanwhile, as soon as the fighting starts, the DMZ turns into a sea of fire. Seoul and Incheon, the capital and primary port for the South, both within easy gun/rocket range of the DMZ (you can bet those gun emplacements are already pre-sighted), are decimated within a day. 100,000 SK and 20,000 US troops hunker down to resume the WWI-style trench warfare that characterized the latter years of the Korean War, and nothing of value is gained. A fast amphibious force from the west could probably capture Pyongyang, given the current lack of Chinese support for NK and the fact that most of the NK forces are concentrated at the front, but then what? You'd still have the full stalemate at the most fortified military position in human history, and your quick-strike force would be left holding a town in the middle of a population so hostile it makes Iraq and Vietnam look like Kentucky.
The Chinese taught the N Koreans how to dig in. Dug in they are, culturally and militarily. There's a report floating around somewhere stating that the only possible way to reinitiate the Korean War without unacceptable losses, both military and civilian, is a first-strike with chemical weapons. Even with that, the report said it would take four times as much nerve gas as the US ever had on hand at any time.
Some tumors you just can't slice out. You can isolate them and try to prevent them from growing, but the surgery is just too dangerous.
If I were China, I'd already be backing away from them.
They already are. All this hubbub is in response to a UN vote censuring them for the December rocket launch. The vote was unanimous - China did not back them up or even abstain.
I'll probably get flak for using a sports analogy on a geek site, but coaches watch game film of their own team just as much as they do of the opposing team. When you know your own habits, your own strengths and liabilities, it's a lot harder to be blindsided by something you didn't expect.
This is a joke
I'm not getting the joke
Make up your mind?
You ever watch March of the Penguins? They already have unions down there!
I know next to nothing about cameras, etc. However, I'd suggest you go look at the specs for some e-readers, if you can find them. I'd figure the design people for Amazon, B&N, or whoever else already did the homework on refresh rate, color balance, etc. to ensure readability.
The abstract mentions that this is the first time anyone's seen a GM2 reaction in mice due to an external stimulus. I'm curious - how much do we know about brain lipid levels? Are they generally static, or do they vary with age, disease, mood, diet, etc.?
Who needs an icicle when you can just Un-Print your knife?
Unless you have a robot with poking capabilities inside the bag with you, of course.
You donated the sequence of information that is the inherent root of your entire unique identity...and you're mad that someone used it to discover your identity?