Except those strategies suck when watching movies! I used to be 'face blind' as well. Until I realized it was mainly being '3d object' blind. It's amazingly easier to store a face as ONE object than it is to store a part of an infinite collection of 2d slices from different angles. Once your visual system is working properly, tiny details are mostly irrelevant, it's just the object and it's movement pattern.
3d vision sure wreaks havoc on photographic memory though.
Depends, people who lack stereoscopic vision have the same problems identifying partial objects, mainly because they have no 3d models to match against.
The less preconceived notions you have about the reality around you the less this occurs. Awareness is king, but most people just live in their heads. Ageing is the retreat from reality.
The interesting thing about Top-down processing in the human visual system is that YOUR experiences are the ones that create the models, and YOUR experiences can change those models.
Read some John C. Lilly to find out how to enter debug mode....or recent medical research on ptsd, but Lilly is just more entertaining.
Do not confuse the lack, or not, of a definition/term/standard, and the consistent application of that definition/term/standard.
Humans always interpret stuff differently, that's a problem every study faces.
This is not crap science, it's 'exploratory' science. I always wonder about the mentality of people that think it's even possible to address every single issue in a first study. Science and especially research grants do NOT work that way.
Fuck, why is it so hard to get people on slashdot to understand how science actually works!!!
You read wrong. The problem was with the fact there wasn't too much agreement on WHAT was an assertion, and they provided a logical reason for that, though no data.
umm, they did mention where they told people to search, and they did mention at least the current occupations of the reviewers. They didn't have 'all kinds of mathematical figures' (I'm starting to suspect you've never read a paper before). They had tables, which showed examples of how they classified concordance or not. They don't have names, but why would they, or do you not know how science is conducted?
Whether or not they're an osteopath has nothing to do with whether or not they are competent reviewers. It seems everybody on slashdot is always eager to apply the fallacy of genus. What's with the tribal attitude and lack of logical thinking?
The only gripe I have, since they lay everything else out pretty crystal clear for those capable of reading, is that the data isn't provided. Though that's usually just an email away from any researcher. It would be nice to see the severity and importance of the discordances. If they classify the inability to find concordance on the etymology section of diabetes by looking at pubmed, well, that's just sad.
+4 insightful for a load of tripe, welcome to the new slashdot.
BTW, for your edification, next time you'll find all that information if you don't assume the ABSTRACT is the whole paper, try scrolling down a bit.
Ah, well, here's a hint. When replying to made up conversations in your head, keep the response in your head.
I fully agree though, lots of tabs horizontally is pointless when you only see one webpage on your screen.
If you're still failing to comprehend the train of thought, some people who have lots of tabs open (note i didn't mention anything about how the tabs are layed out) might actually appreciate seeing more than one webpage at a time, which this screen allows.
For the original troll, if he still can't comprehend, web dev's actually like to do that sometimes. You know, coding the page and seeing the immediate results in the top 3 browsers all at the same time at the same resolution is pretty handy.
I know the tendency of slashdotters to read-between-the-lines when there isn't anything there, and I actually specifically chose every single word in that sentence to not be loaded. It does not criticize or implicate any parties, it is as precise as necessary, there is no slang or words with double meanings. It is as literal and devoid of possible misinterpretations as possible...
Perhaps you should read the report? They put a lot of blame on NWP.
And nobody but you is saying anything about nuclear POWER, we're talking about nuclear waste, that other part of the nuclear industry. So, perhaps you need to check your preconceptions, YOUR agenda, and read a little more slowly?
Perhaps they're 'british' and frown upon the use of single quotes to denote a specific field's definition or a non-literal definition?
The interesting thing is that it was detected by air monitoring equipment, an obviously good design choice, but when you hear about the rest of the air system....
The more interesting story here is not the cat litter crap, but all of the design choices and things that were cut to get things done. It does not inspire confidence in the ability of the nuclear industry's safety standards to escape unscathed by bureaucracy.
The Board identified the root cause to be a failure to fully understand, characterize, and control the radiological hazard among management at WIPP, the operating contractor, and the Carlsbad Field Office.
Not sure why I was modded down for pointing out you were making an assumption without any data. Slashdots seems to be turning into a hangout for believers and ignorant retaliatory tribes.
For you to be even technically correct, they would have had to identify what exactly was the problem, and as anybody who can navigate a website can see, they still aren't sure and they still do not know when their second report on the actual causes will be out.
...this is an example of quick recognition and response to a problem.
um, no. How can you call it quick recognition when we're talking about cold-war era waste and products from decades ago and the only reason they realized something was wrong was because of an 'explosion'?
Christians are faggots who follow the son of a molested child who worshiped his own thoughts.
Come to think of it, since pretty much every single civilization in existence had no problem with marriage at birth and consummation at puberty or earlier...
We're all faggots descended from child molesters!! Some, like the parent, obviously subjected to more inbreeding.
Oh, for the blind ignorance to judge past civilizations through the skewed zeitgeist of the day.
Unlike most people, I have this annoying habit where I check the definitions for pretty much everything. Frequently checking etymology as well. Why, I even read articles!
See, I have the superpower of being able to admit that i'm wrong and frequently acknowledge my fallibility. So the first thing that occured to me upon reading your comment was that perhaps my understanding of the word snarky was wrong.
I checked. It's not.
True, I can't compensate for people who read things that aren't there...
Go up the thread and read slowly. Notice the '*windows*' line?
Don't confuse what the person in the video was saying about seeing more info in the tabs (which is really kinda dumb) and displaying more than one web page horizontally.
Why would you turn away from Oculus just because of FB and then turn towards Sony?
Yes, FB uses your info, they say they will in their user agreement, and yes they leave a bunch of stuff open but they also give you the option to shut stuff down.
Sony on the other hand has been known for fucking over people with absolutely zero permission and absolutely no way to stop it.
Slashdot Mirror
3d vision sure wreaks havoc on photographic memory though.
Depends, people who lack stereoscopic vision have the same problems identifying partial objects, mainly because they have no 3d models to match against.
The less preconceived notions you have about the reality around you the less this occurs. Awareness is king, but most people just live in their heads. Ageing is the retreat from reality.
The interesting thing about Top-down processing in the human visual system is that YOUR experiences are the ones that create the models, and YOUR experiences can change those models.
Read some John C. Lilly to find out how to enter debug mode. ...or recent medical research on ptsd, but Lilly is just more entertaining.
As a child I always wondered why I couldn't 'see' a bunch of illusions, until I learned how to use my other eye.
Humans always interpret stuff differently, that's a problem every study faces.
This is not crap science, it's 'exploratory' science. I always wonder about the mentality of people that think it's even possible to address every single issue in a first study. Science and especially research grants do NOT work that way.
Fuck, why is it so hard to get people on slashdot to understand how science actually works!!!
You read wrong. The problem was with the fact there wasn't too much agreement on WHAT was an assertion, and they provided a logical reason for that, though no data.
Whether or not they're an osteopath has nothing to do with whether or not they are competent reviewers. It seems everybody on slashdot is always eager to apply the fallacy of genus. What's with the tribal attitude and lack of logical thinking?
The only gripe I have, since they lay everything else out pretty crystal clear for those capable of reading, is that the data isn't provided. Though that's usually just an email away from any researcher. It would be nice to see the severity and importance of the discordances. If they classify the inability to find concordance on the etymology section of diabetes by looking at pubmed, well, that's just sad.
+4 insightful for a load of tripe, welcome to the new slashdot.
BTW, for your edification, next time you'll find all that information if you don't assume the ABSTRACT is the whole paper, try scrolling down a bit.
I fully agree though, lots of tabs horizontally is pointless when you only see one webpage on your screen.
If you're still failing to comprehend the train of thought, some people who have lots of tabs open (note i didn't mention anything about how the tabs are layed out) might actually appreciate seeing more than one webpage at a time, which this screen allows.
For the original troll, if he still can't comprehend, web dev's actually like to do that sometimes. You know, coding the page and seeing the immediate results in the top 3 browsers all at the same time at the same resolution is pretty handy.
I know the tendency of slashdotters to read-between-the-lines when there isn't anything there, and I actually specifically chose every single word in that sentence to not be loaded. It does not criticize or implicate any parties, it is as precise as necessary, there is no slang or words with double meanings. It is as literal and devoid of possible misinterpretations as possible...
or so I thought.
And nobody but you is saying anything about nuclear POWER, we're talking about nuclear waste, that other part of the nuclear industry. So, perhaps you need to check your preconceptions, YOUR agenda, and read a little more slowly?
The interesting thing is that it was detected by air monitoring equipment, an obviously good design choice, but when you hear about the rest of the air system....
The more interesting story here is not the cat litter crap, but all of the design choices and things that were cut to get things done. It does not inspire confidence in the ability of the nuclear industry's safety standards to escape unscathed by bureaucracy.
The Board identified the root cause to be a failure to fully understand, characterize, and control the radiological hazard among management at WIPP, the operating contractor, and the Carlsbad Field Office.
Not sure why I was modded down for pointing out you were making an assumption without any data. Slashdots seems to be turning into a hangout for believers and ignorant retaliatory tribes.
For you to be even technically correct, they would have had to identify what exactly was the problem, and as anybody who can navigate a website can see, they still aren't sure and they still do not know when their second report on the actual causes will be out.
They did respond quickly though, so that's good.
It always is sarcastic idiot :)
No, you don't do you. So how can you tell?
...this is an example of quick recognition and response to a problem.
um, no. How can you call it quick recognition when we're talking about cold-war era waste and products from decades ago and the only reason they realized something was wrong was because of an 'explosion'?
Come to think of it, since pretty much every single civilization in existence had no problem with marriage at birth and consummation at puberty or earlier...
We're all faggots descended from child molesters!! Some, like the parent, obviously subjected to more inbreeding.
Oh, for the blind ignorance to judge past civilizations through the skewed zeitgeist of the day.
It'll void your warranty and then you won't be able to get anymore security updates!!
As for further Amazon stupidity/capitalism, they sell free Lisp books for $50-$350.
See, I have the superpower of being able to admit that i'm wrong and frequently acknowledge my fallibility. So the first thing that occured to me upon reading your comment was that perhaps my understanding of the word snarky was wrong.
I checked. It's not.
True, I can't compensate for people who read things that aren't there...
Go up the thread and read slowly. Notice the '*windows*' line?
Don't confuse what the person in the video was saying about seeing more info in the tabs (which is really kinda dumb) and displaying more than one web page horizontally.
Already exists in the 'oral' section of adult films.
Yes, FB uses your info, they say they will in their user agreement, and yes they leave a bunch of stuff open but they also give you the option to shut stuff down.
Sony on the other hand has been known for fucking over people with absolutely zero permission and absolutely no way to stop it.
Maybe you're just really young?
That would be the Ministry of State Security.
Well, they were adverse to the oxymoron suspended-animation, perhaps internally they were already using the oxymoron 'the living dead'.