After only having her for about 3 weeks, she was already quite good at sitting, staying, and running up when called for. Humans, by contrast, take a couple years before they comprehend the simplest words and actions.
How long have you known you wife, and does she sit, stay, and come running when called?
Point being, is that many humans never comprehend the simplest words and actions.
I've had a numb left hand from the wrist down from hitting the escape key all the time when I was a code monkey.
I always wanted a foot pedal for the escape key, possibly one that instead of toggles between insert and command, to one that you have to hold like a shift, alt, or control key in order for command mode to work. Think about never having to have your hands leave the home keys. Although, that might lead to RSI as well.
If you're a christian church and focusing more on the old testament than the new - and especially the loving and forgiving christ (Jesus), isn't it a fair case to call you a jew instead of a christian?
No, Jews believe that the son of god in human form has not happened yet, Christians do. That difference seems like it could be a big deal if you think about it.
He also highlights several games that, instead of focusing on the female form in its big breasted glory, showcase women who are intelligent, strong, and powerful.
As a male who is being entertained by a game that consists of stealing cars, beating up people, killing them, running them over, getting high, running illegal drugs, and having sex with prostitutes; the addition of intelligent, strong, and powerful women would definitely add to the entertainment factor over a hot chick with big breasts.
Mine is Sony as well, its probably basically the same receiver. Mine calls "Normal Surround" something like AFD (Auto Format Detection? Dunno, its auto something), but no, it doesn't auto detect Pro-Logic from Dolby Digital. It detects Dolby Digital, then defaults to Pro-Logic even if its stereo, pro-logic, not sure what mono does.
The other is "Game", which is stereo-only and has no processing whatsoever.
Mine calls it "2 Channel". Another thing I have is sometimes the subwoofer works (there is a display that shows what speakers are active) in stereo mode, sometimes it doesn't.
They are right next to each other on the mode rotation and I can control them from my remote. (Actually, it's easier to do from the remote.)
That is fine for you, but the whole point of my original post, is that there should be a way to simply use one remote to control your entertainments system and it should display the audio and video correctly without having to take the remote and/or adjust the receiver and/or TV because its simply too difficult (not that difficult, they just don't know all of the settings) for my friend or girlfriend and "get it right", and then have to do it again if I switch the channel or media.
This is not very complex stuff here, but it is made to be complex. All it needs to be is a simple choice of input, adjustment of the TV channel, DVD track, CD track, adjustment of the volume, and that is it. Maybe adjust the bass and/or treble.
Oh, and not to mention that if you want to use an SACD, it requires additional settings on the receiver (multi-channel input), and 6 analog cables from the DVD/SACD player for that to work. Forgot to mention that format.
If you were any more polite, I'd tell you to fuck off.
Okay, and so that's automatically because of copyright infringement?
No, it was from people downloading music off of the internet.
Have you ever heard of digital downloads
Yeah, that is what we are talking about. Digital downloads at that time was Napster (they closed down right before her store), remember them?
used CD sales
She sold used CDs, but then again there was one more store that was further down the road (not walking distance) that had higher priced ones and gave you less for your used disks.
ebay/half.com, or any other place to buy CDs besides a local music store?
Those were not big at the time. I'm not even sure half.com existed.
Actually, the because is my own input (WTF?), I have no idea why it would actually work that way, but it seems that the people who do the most downloading also buy the most CDs.
Who would have thunk that music buffs are more into music than those who aren't into music much?
No, that just means that the market is changing. That shop owner, much like the RIAA, needs to adapt. The market is moving towards digital downloads and away from CDs for music distribution.
Like I said, she adapted and opened up a clothing store or something. It was no big deal, but that was the first and only time I have spoken with someone whose current livelihood was affected by downloads. She didn't know much about computers to set up a download site, and even if she did, she would not have been able to get content or customers. Actually, it was back in 2002, right after the napster thing, not two years ago.
I hope this was supposed to be an ironic/sarcastic comment. Surround sound "just works" these days, and it works with a single cable.
Not really. Even with a digital cable, it cannot tell the difference between stereo and Dolby Pro Logic, and as I said, it does weird stuff with mono. Like with the movie Wargames, it was encoded in DD "5.1" mono. I just have my TV hooked up to stereo because its easier to adjust the volume with one remote that way (another gripe, still using infrared remotes that must be in line of site, are difficult to program, and have no bi-directional capabilites). But anyway, I don't know what 5.1 mono is. It may have been blasting you with all 5 speakers, which would suck much more than the same signal coming out of two speakers.
Surround has gotten a little better, but nothing has been done about adding "magic" or whatever to the soundtracks that are not DD or DTS, and as I said the DD can be weird at times (Wargames) and the DTS does not work with DTS audio sometimes. Maybe I need to continue buying new stuff, my receiver and DVD player is two years old now.
Theft deprives someone of something. Copyright infringement is a wholly separate thing. You are stupid. Thank you.
Yeah, when I spoke with the owner of a local CD shop that was in walking distance to a University, and she was saying that she was going out of business 2 years ago because nobody was buying CDs anymore saw it as an opportunity to do something different. There still is one CD store left in town, but then there is always Target and Wal-mart.
So, yeah she wasn't deprived of much. Its all perception.
As a middle-aged geek (37) and programmer, I just have too much stuff in my head to pay attention to EVERYTHING that I come across.
I'm about the same age, and I will concur with this statement.
Overall, I have been very disappointed in much of today's technology recently, something like the past 10 years or so.
It kills me that in 2005, I still have to be a complete geek and know bunches of stuff just to get things like surround sound (which I gave up on) and HDTV to work correctly.
Surround sound was screwed up at the beginning when it came out in the mid '70s. It was a hack that used a standard stereo soundtrack and snuck in secret encoding like those red decoders you get in cereal. The information that was completely in phase between the channels was interpreted as a center channel signal, and the completely out of phase information was thrown in mono to the surround speakers. So, if I hook up my TV to surround receiver, I get anything from a mono signal only going to the center speaker, which can change at ads or vice versa, or worse I get a program that was intended to just be stereo, and it mysteriously floats around the speakers because of the misinterpretation of surround information. I can fix it by adjusting the receiver to be in surround or stereo, but then I do something stupid like change the channel and the encoding is wrong again. Then you have DTS signals that you can get in audio or on video. That sounds excellent, much better than Dolby Digital. If you cant tell the difference between a typical MP3 and an ogg, then it doesn't matter for you, but DD and MP3 is bad in the mid to high range. Sounds dull, and not as bright and lively as DTS or ogg (vorbis, another beef with the container and codec game). Anyway, DTS signals are some kind of hack of two channel data, or something I don't know, but some DVD players, computer programs, and receivers have difficulty detecting the hack and send nice white or pink noise sounding stuff to your ears. Thanks.
Now, with HDTV. Give me a break here. There is DLP, Plasma, LCD, rear projection, standard tube, of course in 4:3 format and 16:9. Now the information sent to your TV is a mystery. DVDs can be 4:3 or 16:9, or sometimes they are 4:3 that are morphed down to 2.35:1 with about 1/2 of the screen as black bars. With the last format, you adjust your 16:9 TV to "zoom", and you miss a little of the "widescreen" information on your widescreen tv. It just just as black bared on a 4:3 TV (I did this the other night with Wargames DVD). Now there is standard 4:3 content where you can choose to put your tv into regular mode where there is black (or worse grey) bars on the left and right side. Or you can do the "wide zoom" which stretches and zooms into the signal to cut off the top and bottom a little and stretches everything which looks a little funny on people's faces. Or you could cut off their heads with the "zoom" feature, but maintain the faces proportion (minus the top of their head). Then if you get HDTV signal, you cannot adjust the zoom, wide zoom stuff, it is done for you. Thank god! But some channels like ESPNHD put nifty bars on the side of your screen to let you know your watching HDTV widescreen stuff with a pretty curtain around the 4:3 content. Then there is TNT which wrongly sends either stretched stuff or correct stuff to the TV.
That is not to mention the component, composite, DVI, or HDMI video connectors or the standard RCA, SPDIF that comes in optical and RCA looking digital varieties, or even balanced XLR cables.
Give me a fucking break. I'm a geek and I actually know what this shit means, but how the fuck is someone "normal" supposed to know or care? With my car, I pick the right grade of gas, which doesn't really matter, they will all work (except diesel), and I have to change the fluids in it every couple of months, but that hasn't changed much for over 50 years.
To watch TV and/or listen to music, you have to be an electrical engineer, and then the stuff stil
I think that for the average user who isn't willing to make a commitment to these things
Tell me about it.
For security and performance reasons for my car I had to do a number of things. I have replaced the default engine with a more powerful one. I have installed bulletproof glass. I have reinforced the undercarriage and roof and and doors to curtail an assault. I have runflat tires. The air intake extends 6 feet off the ground in case of flooding. I take it weekly back to the 3rd party "fixer upper" guy to make sure everything is still in tact. I always travel in the middle of a six car convoy to buffer myself from the front and behind. And I surely reinforced the firewall between the engine and the interior of the car.
I don't have to wear a bulletproof vest because of these precautions, and I have never been shot that I know of.
I think that for the average driver who isn't willing to make a commitment to these things, legalistic use of armor is necessary, but the study incorrectly assumes that "no armor" = "dead".
Oh, BTW, for security on my computers I just plug my Mac into the wall and either use a wired or wireless network connection. After all I go through traveling from point A to B, why would I screw around with my computer?
Shunpei Yamazaki: semiconductors and other things for displays like LCD Donald E. Weder: flower pot guy Kia Silverbrook: computers especially printing Mark I. Gardner: semiconductors especially doping Salman Akram: semiconductors - fabrication Warren M. Farnworth: semiconductors again - fabrication Ravi Kumar Arimilli: computers - especially memory access Leonard Forbes: higher level semiconductors like eeprom nand gates, etc Jay S. Walker: mostly games and lottery stuff another patent for "insurance syndication" Jennifer L. Hillman: nucleotide sequencing and amino acid sequencing for diseases
Looking for possible patterns in large volumes of data is dangerous because of the high chance that random data will fit some of the myriad patterns tried.
No, God put the figure of Jesus in the sky, but made it not look too much like Jesus just to test the difference between the believers and non-believers. Trust me, it was not easy to do all that with nobody looking.
Yes, clearly in 1938 the Nuremberg Laws, the forced sterilization of Gypsies and the handicapped, the re-armament of the Rhineland, the outright assassination of political opponen...
That was normal then. Here in the US we had the Jim Crow laws that were revoked in 1964. In South Africa, there was apartheid that lasted until very recently. Also, the US government experimented on syphilis on black people for 40 years. If you know anything about syphilis, you can appreciate the injustice here.
The Germans and the US were in a bad depression and would do anything to get out of it. The Germans took it out on non-Germans and started remaking the map of Europe. Its common for a group of people that are stressed to get tight and nationalistic and take out scapegoats. Look at the US during WWI, WWII, and after the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks. Flags a waving, and a desire to go and kill the bad guy. The people in the US used conquering Japan and Germany to get out of their depression, just like Germans followed Hitler to get out of theirs. The US has never, and apparently will never have an "enemy". Look at pro "wrestling", they were first Nazi's, then Russians and Iranians, I guess now they are terrorists (don't watch it).
He wasn't some fairytale poster boy who just randomly went bad; though I've never read it, I understand that the size of his ambition is evident in Mein Kampf, written long before 1938.
I'll be sure to never mention his name again. Its just a bad thing. Mein Kamph was written during his 8 month jail sentence for the '23 attempt to take over Germany.
No, he is no more of a fairytale poster boy than anybody. He was basically given permission to do what he wanted by millions of people.
Humans by definition are created by other humans. All of them. The good and the bad. If any human is not in contact with others they don't walk upright, they do not and cannot learn to speak, they surely will not ever rule a country. Hitler is a black eye on almost everybody's face.
I would guess that one's ability to do a basic survival technique, like getting something to eat, would correlate highly with the quality and time spent training in this area. And considering that those with higher IQs are faster at learning, I'd guess those with high IQs would be better at providing for themselves (in a situation where everybody had the same training).
It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value.
--Arthur C. Clarke
Its a know fact that the higher your intelligence and education, the fewer offspring you have. Although, those do have a higher survival rate, but even accounting for that, there are and it seems as though that there will always be fewer "intelligent" guys than not.
Maybe this will change, but the data do not support it.
The criteria for Time's Man of the Year is the man who had the most influence on news that year. Nothing about it being an influence for good.
By looking at the list, I would like to believe that is true. This is the caption for Hitler: "His figure strode over Europe with all the swagger of a conqueror".
Also, keep in mind that in 1938 that the Nazi party and Hitler were fairly new, and were not yet seen as that bad. Germany's economy was just coming out of the sewer. In 1938, Hitler introduced the world to the Volkswagon Beetle, the most popular car in the world, and one that went without major redesign for many years. It was not until the end of 38 that Hitler started doing what he is known for today.
I believe all of the above (except, smart is spelled smart and not smrt:)
IQ is best described as a score on an IQ test. Sure, there is some correlation (external validity in the psychology testing vocabulary) to the outside world.
There are aspects of IQ that are never measured on an IQ test. Ever play basketball with someone that was really good, and the guy was always at the right place at the right time? Some of these guys are exceptional at this and make millions a year. That is entirely a cognitive effort. Being tall and/or strong will not continuously put you in the right place at the right time on the court.
What about one's ability to hunt and kill an animal and prepare it for food? This is basic stuff, but most everybody on the higher end of the "IQ" scale would not know how to do this. In fact, I would guess there is an inverse relationship between "IQ" and one's ability to do a basic survival technique like getting something to eat.
Just some things for those with higher IQs to think about.
Slashdot Mirror
After only having her for about 3 weeks, she was already quite good at sitting, staying, and running up when called for. Humans, by contrast, take a couple years before they comprehend the simplest words and actions.
How long have you known you wife, and does she sit, stay, and come running when called?
Point being, is that many humans never comprehend the simplest words and actions.
(Yes, this was supposed to be funny. YMMV)
I can't tell you how many times I wanted to say to a user:
"Which part of 'no such file or directory' didn't you understand?"
Which implies powering it on and making sure it boots before putting it in the rack.
now a vim-user
I've had a numb left hand from the wrist down from hitting the escape key all the time when I was a code monkey.
I always wanted a foot pedal for the escape key, possibly one that instead of toggles between insert and command, to one that you have to hold like a shift, alt, or control key in order for command mode to work. Think about never having to have your hands leave the home keys. Although, that might lead to RSI as well.
If you're a christian church and focusing more on the old testament than the new - and especially the loving and forgiving christ (Jesus), isn't it a fair case to call you a jew instead of a christian?
No, Jews believe that the son of god in human form has not happened yet, Christians do. That difference seems like it could be a big deal if you think about it.
He'd lie on the ground bleeding, same as Mirecki did.
And, I thought my life was bad.
Is this a good quality in a human being? I'm not saying that my hat's off to the guy who beat him, but I would not want to be on either side.
He also highlights several games that, instead of focusing on the female form in its big breasted glory, showcase women who are intelligent, strong, and powerful.
As a male who is being entertained by a game that consists of stealing cars, beating up people, killing them, running them over, getting high, running illegal drugs, and having sex with prostitutes; the addition of intelligent, strong, and powerful women would definitely add to the entertainment factor over a hot chick with big breasts.
Mine is Sony as well, its probably basically the same receiver. Mine calls "Normal Surround" something like AFD (Auto Format Detection? Dunno, its auto something), but no, it doesn't auto detect Pro-Logic from Dolby Digital. It detects Dolby Digital, then defaults to Pro-Logic even if its stereo, pro-logic, not sure what mono does.
The other is "Game", which is stereo-only and has no processing whatsoever.
Mine calls it "2 Channel". Another thing I have is sometimes the subwoofer works (there is a display that shows what speakers are active) in stereo mode, sometimes it doesn't.
They are right next to each other on the mode rotation and I can control them from my remote. (Actually, it's easier to do from the remote.)
That is fine for you, but the whole point of my original post, is that there should be a way to simply use one remote to control your entertainments system and it should display the audio and video correctly without having to take the remote and/or adjust the receiver and/or TV because its simply too difficult (not that difficult, they just don't know all of the settings) for my friend or girlfriend and "get it right", and then have to do it again if I switch the channel or media.
This is not very complex stuff here, but it is made to be complex. All it needs to be is a simple choice of input, adjustment of the TV channel, DVD track, CD track, adjustment of the volume, and that is it. Maybe adjust the bass and/or treble.
Oh, and not to mention that if you want to use an SACD, it requires additional settings on the receiver (multi-channel input), and 6 analog cables from the DVD/SACD player for that to work. Forgot to mention that format.
You're even dumber than the other guy.
If you were any more polite, I'd tell you to fuck off.
Okay, and so that's automatically because of copyright infringement?
No, it was from people downloading music off of the internet.
Have you ever heard of digital downloads
Yeah, that is what we are talking about. Digital downloads at that time was Napster (they closed down right before her store), remember them?
used CD sales
She sold used CDs, but then again there was one more store that was further down the road (not walking distance) that had higher priced ones and gave you less for your used disks.
ebay/half.com, or any other place to buy CDs besides a local music store?
Those were not big at the time. I'm not even sure half.com existed.
Actually, the because is my own input (WTF?), I have no idea why it would actually work that way, but it seems that the people who do the most downloading also buy the most CDs.
Who would have thunk that music buffs are more into music than those who aren't into music much?
No, that just means that the market is changing. That shop owner, much like the RIAA, needs to adapt. The market is moving towards digital downloads and away from CDs for music distribution.
Like I said, she adapted and opened up a clothing store or something. It was no big deal, but that was the first and only time I have spoken with someone whose current livelihood was affected by downloads. She didn't know much about computers to set up a download site, and even if she did, she would not have been able to get content or customers. Actually, it was back in 2002, right after the napster thing, not two years ago.
I hope this was supposed to be an ironic/sarcastic comment. Surround sound "just works" these days, and it works with a single cable.
Not really. Even with a digital cable, it cannot tell the difference between stereo and Dolby Pro Logic, and as I said, it does weird stuff with mono. Like with the movie Wargames, it was encoded in DD "5.1" mono. I just have my TV hooked up to stereo because its easier to adjust the volume with one remote that way (another gripe, still using infrared remotes that must be in line of site, are difficult to program, and have no bi-directional capabilites). But anyway, I don't know what 5.1 mono is. It may have been blasting you with all 5 speakers, which would suck much more than the same signal coming out of two speakers.
Surround has gotten a little better, but nothing has been done about adding "magic" or whatever to the soundtracks that are not DD or DTS, and as I said the DD can be weird at times (Wargames) and the DTS does not work with DTS audio sometimes. Maybe I need to continue buying new stuff, my receiver and DVD player is two years old now.
Theft deprives someone of something. Copyright infringement is a wholly separate thing. You are stupid. Thank you.
Yeah, when I spoke with the owner of a local CD shop that was in walking distance to a University, and she was saying that she was going out of business 2 years ago because nobody was buying CDs anymore saw it as an opportunity to do something different. There still is one CD store left in town, but then there is always Target and Wal-mart.
So, yeah she wasn't deprived of much. Its all perception.
As a middle-aged geek (37) and programmer, I just have too much stuff in my head to pay attention to EVERYTHING that I come across.
I'm about the same age, and I will concur with this statement.
Overall, I have been very disappointed in much of today's technology recently, something like the past 10 years or so.
It kills me that in 2005, I still have to be a complete geek and know bunches of stuff just to get things like surround sound (which I gave up on) and HDTV to work correctly.
Surround sound was screwed up at the beginning when it came out in the mid '70s. It was a hack that used a standard stereo soundtrack and snuck in secret encoding like those red decoders you get in cereal. The information that was completely in phase between the channels was interpreted as a center channel signal, and the completely out of phase information was thrown in mono to the surround speakers. So, if I hook up my TV to surround receiver, I get anything from a mono signal only going to the center speaker, which can change at ads or vice versa, or worse I get a program that was intended to just be stereo, and it mysteriously floats around the speakers because of the misinterpretation of surround information. I can fix it by adjusting the receiver to be in surround or stereo, but then I do something stupid like change the channel and the encoding is wrong again. Then you have DTS signals that you can get in audio or on video. That sounds excellent, much better than Dolby Digital. If you cant tell the difference between a typical MP3 and an ogg, then it doesn't matter for you, but DD and MP3 is bad in the mid to high range. Sounds dull, and not as bright and lively as DTS or ogg (vorbis, another beef with the container and codec game). Anyway, DTS signals are some kind of hack of two channel data, or something I don't know, but some DVD players, computer programs, and receivers have difficulty detecting the hack and send nice white or pink noise sounding stuff to your ears. Thanks.
Now, with HDTV. Give me a break here. There is DLP, Plasma, LCD, rear projection, standard tube, of course in 4:3 format and 16:9. Now the information sent to your TV is a mystery. DVDs can be 4:3 or 16:9, or sometimes they are 4:3 that are morphed down to 2.35:1 with about 1/2 of the screen as black bars. With the last format, you adjust your 16:9 TV to "zoom", and you miss a little of the "widescreen" information on your widescreen tv. It just just as black bared on a 4:3 TV (I did this the other night with Wargames DVD). Now there is standard 4:3 content where you can choose to put your tv into regular mode where there is black (or worse grey) bars on the left and right side. Or you can do the "wide zoom" which stretches and zooms into the signal to cut off the top and bottom a little and stretches everything which looks a little funny on people's faces. Or you could cut off their heads with the "zoom" feature, but maintain the faces proportion (minus the top of their head). Then if you get HDTV signal, you cannot adjust the zoom, wide zoom stuff, it is done for you. Thank god! But some channels like ESPNHD put nifty bars on the side of your screen to let you know your watching HDTV widescreen stuff with a pretty curtain around the 4:3 content. Then there is TNT which wrongly sends either stretched stuff or correct stuff to the TV.
That is not to mention the component, composite, DVI, or HDMI video connectors or the standard RCA, SPDIF that comes in optical and RCA looking digital varieties, or even balanced XLR cables.
Give me a fucking break. I'm a geek and I actually know what this shit means, but how the fuck is someone "normal" supposed to know or care? With my car, I pick the right grade of gas, which doesn't really matter, they will all work (except diesel), and I have to change the fluids in it every couple of months, but that hasn't changed much for over 50 years.
To watch TV and/or listen to music, you have to be an electrical engineer, and then the stuff stil
I have to chase the article down the toilet with the server, the printer, and the RSS feed!
Yuck!
Any mirrors?
I must have worked at the same place. Or are they all like that?
In this Post 9/11 World. . .
In 23 days, it will be a new year.
I think that for the average user who isn't willing to make a commitment to these things
Tell me about it.
For security and performance reasons for my car I had to do a number of things. I have replaced the default engine with a more powerful one. I have installed bulletproof glass. I have reinforced the undercarriage and roof and and doors to curtail an assault. I have runflat tires. The air intake extends 6 feet off the ground in case of flooding. I take it weekly back to the 3rd party "fixer upper" guy to make sure everything is still in tact. I always travel in the middle of a six car convoy to buffer myself from the front and behind. And I surely reinforced the firewall between the engine and the interior of the car.
I don't have to wear a bulletproof vest because of these precautions, and I have never been shot that I know of.
I think that for the average driver who isn't willing to make a commitment to these things, legalistic use of armor is necessary, but the study incorrectly assumes that "no armor" = "dead".
Oh, BTW, for security on my computers I just plug my Mac into the wall and either use a wired or wireless network connection. After all I go through traveling from point A to B, why would I screw around with my computer?
In case you wanted to know what they did:
Shunpei Yamazaki: semiconductors and other things for displays like LCD
Donald E. Weder: flower pot guy
Kia Silverbrook: computers especially printing
Mark I. Gardner: semiconductors especially doping
Salman Akram: semiconductors - fabrication
Warren M. Farnworth: semiconductors again - fabrication
Ravi Kumar Arimilli: computers - especially memory access
Leonard Forbes: higher level semiconductors like eeprom nand gates, etc
Jay S. Walker: mostly games and lottery stuff another patent for "insurance syndication"
Jennifer L. Hillman: nucleotide sequencing and amino acid sequencing for diseases
Looking for possible patterns in large volumes of data is dangerous because of the high chance that random data will fit some of the myriad patterns tried.
No, God put the figure of Jesus in the sky, but made it not look too much like Jesus just to test the difference between the believers and non-believers. Trust me, it was not easy to do all that with nobody looking.
Yes, clearly in 1938 the Nuremberg Laws, the forced sterilization of Gypsies and the handicapped, the re-armament of the Rhineland, the outright assassination of political opponen...
That was normal then. Here in the US we had the Jim Crow laws that were revoked in 1964. In South Africa, there was apartheid that lasted until very recently. Also, the US government experimented on syphilis on black people for 40 years. If you know anything about syphilis, you can appreciate the injustice here.
The Germans and the US were in a bad depression and would do anything to get out of it. The Germans took it out on non-Germans and started remaking the map of Europe. Its common for a group of people that are stressed to get tight and nationalistic and take out scapegoats. Look at the US during WWI, WWII, and after the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks. Flags a waving, and a desire to go and kill the bad guy. The people in the US used conquering Japan and Germany to get out of their depression, just like Germans followed Hitler to get out of theirs. The US has never, and apparently will never have an "enemy". Look at pro "wrestling", they were first Nazi's, then Russians and Iranians, I guess now they are terrorists (don't watch it).
He wasn't some fairytale poster boy who just randomly went bad; though I've never read it, I understand that the size of his ambition is evident in Mein Kampf, written long before 1938.
I'll be sure to never mention his name again. Its just a bad thing. Mein Kamph was written during his 8 month jail sentence for the '23 attempt to take over Germany.
No, he is no more of a fairytale poster boy than anybody. He was basically given permission to do what he wanted by millions of people.
Humans by definition are created by other humans. All of them. The good and the bad. If any human is not in contact with others they don't walk upright, they do not and cannot learn to speak, they surely will not ever rule a country. Hitler is a black eye on almost everybody's face.
What's to keep an attacker from routing me somewhere that I don't want to go?
An SSL certificate.
The cert name and the DNS name must agree.
I would guess that one's ability to do a basic survival technique, like getting something to eat, would correlate highly with the quality and time spent training in this area. And considering that those with higher IQs are faster at learning, I'd guess those with high IQs would be better at providing for themselves (in a situation where everybody had the same training).
It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value.
--Arthur C. Clarke
Its a know fact that the higher your intelligence and education, the fewer offspring you have. Although, those do have a higher survival rate, but even accounting for that, there are and it seems as though that there will always be fewer "intelligent" guys than not.
Maybe this will change, but the data do not support it.
The criteria for Time's Man of the Year is the man who had the most influence on news that year. Nothing about it being an influence for good.
By looking at the list, I would like to believe that is true. This is the caption for Hitler: "His figure strode over Europe with all the swagger of a conqueror".
Also, keep in mind that in 1938 that the Nazi party and Hitler were fairly new, and were not yet seen as that bad. Germany's economy was just coming out of the sewer. In 1938, Hitler introduced the world to the Volkswagon Beetle, the most popular car in the world, and one that went without major redesign for many years. It was not until the end of 38 that Hitler started doing what he is known for today.
Nazis killed a bunch of people. Mmmm'kay
Speaking of fascism and other "bad" governments, Check out Time's "Man of the Year" from 1939.
1938 and 1942 are interesting as well.
I believe all of the above (except, smart is spelled smart and not smrt
IQ is best described as a score on an IQ test. Sure, there is some correlation (external validity in the psychology testing vocabulary) to the outside world.
There are aspects of IQ that are never measured on an IQ test. Ever play basketball with someone that was really good, and the guy was always at the right place at the right time? Some of these guys are exceptional at this and make millions a year. That is entirely a cognitive effort. Being tall and/or strong will not continuously put you in the right place at the right time on the court.
What about one's ability to hunt and kill an animal and prepare it for food? This is basic stuff, but most everybody on the higher end of the "IQ" scale would not know how to do this. In fact, I would guess there is an inverse relationship between "IQ" and one's ability to do a basic survival technique like getting something to eat.
Just some things for those with higher IQs to think about.