Windows 8 has gotten more idiot proof than usual, and that's what draws in people that don't already somehow have a PC.
Thing is, make something idiot proof, the universe evolves a better class of idiots.
Might I interest you in purchasing my toothbrush chainsaw?*
* Read the extensive documentation for a safe brushing experience.
Re:Windows 8 seems like a solid product
on
Windows 8 Is Ready
·
· Score: 1
Windows 8 is amazing!
Other OSes are putting real graphic design work into their icons, but not Windows 8. Slap a random white shape on a colored square and you have your program icon. This is brilliant, because it greatly simplifies tech support. When people call up asking how to launch something you can tell them "click on the white icon."
The jury already delivered their verdict and it was the death penalty.
However, the electric chair software ran on Windows 8 and nobody could figure out how to use the new UI, so Microsoft will still be alive and kicking for years to come.
Wow...all that technical stuff...when I think the reason people are more likely to answer "Is this person alive?" with "Yes." when shown a picture is something else entirely.
The English language is a complicated beast. Often things are implied, but not outright stated in English. If you ask "Is this person alive?" with no picture, people assume you are talking about the actual person, so it is clear and they will tend to answer as you'd expect.
However, if you say "Is this person alive?" and show them a picture it gets murky. People likely aren't being influenced by the picture in the way the blurb states though. The blurb interprets the people's wrong answers as an effect of pictures influencing what people think is true. However, the much more obvious way to go is to understand that the inclusion of a picture creates an implied language ambiguity. That is, by asking "Is Bob alive?" you could be asking "Is Bob alive [in reality]?" or "Is Bob alive [in this picture]?" It isn't clear which one you mean, like the other situation was.
The problem is not "truth bias" the problem is language ambiguity.
Apparently, according to different sources 50-100 plants produce caffeine in varying amounts, which makes sense as caffeine is an effective herbicide if you aren't trying to ward off primates with an inflated sense of self-importance.
Narrowing to California, the first species I found that California clearly has was the leaves and flowers of orange trees, though the only exact number I could find was "caffeine is found at concentration levels of 11-17. 5 milligrams per liter, mostly in citrus flowers.” California is a big orange-growing state though.
The other option I found was holly. Southeastern US varieties of holly are quite potent caffeine producers. Indeed, apparently ancient people's used to drink them like we drink coffee. I've seen these caffeine-rich recommended to Californians to use as hedges on some sites and while the zone map for the plant includes California I couldn't find out any info on how widespread the plant is in that region.
I wonder what other plants are rich in caffeine and also if normal plant leaf decomposition could get that caffeine into the water supply?
Actually, space is all in the English system. By a strange coincidence most of the aliens have 12 fingers, 3 toes and 1760 of an appendage we have no name for, so it makes the math easier and is more logical.
However, it's the third link if you didn't read them all.
Defence agent Neil McRobert told the court that Duffy, who was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome when he was five, was in retrospect, "devastated, ashamed and upset" about what he had done.
Being a spectrum disorder, perhaps most people you know are a bit more functional? From the article, we have no way of knowing. Schizophrenic people can also restrain themselves from following the commands of voices they hear, but I am suggesting if we catch them having an outburst where they are yelling at their voices, that there may be a more effective method of handling it than convicting them of disturbing the peace.
This kid had Aspergers. That is sort of an important fact that I don't see being discussed. Aspergers syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction. The lack of demonstrated empathy is possibly the most dysfunctional aspect of Asperger syndrome. So the kid, with a disorder that makes it hard for him to empathize with people, posted some words that were emotionally hurtful, e.g. un-empathetic. He is taken to court and convicted.
I'm sure he'll learn his lesson from his punishment — just like how all schizophrenic people stop hearing voices and all depressed people become happier after you sentence them with crimes.
Sadly, I agree. In modern society laws are frequently far too complex, numerious and counterproductive for average citizens to understand and follow, meaning all citizens are criminals to one degree or another.
I remember, for example, when I learned to drive. I got on the highway and followed the posted speed limit. I was informed by my parent I was driving dangerously and I was! Why? The speed limit was 55 mph but the traffic on the road consistently travels something more like 70 mph and traveling at the speed limit was a great way to get rear-ended. Thus, to safely use the interstate technically requires breaking the laws of the interstate. We get used to these paradoxes in day-to-day life and tend to ignore them, tend to accept them.
That's why one woman on a bus standing up non-violently to one small paradox means something. We need more people like her if justice and law are ever to be in accord.
It is simplistic and likely untrue, but the information did play a part, even if a larger part was likely played both by economics and Mohamed Bouazizi.
Even less then this, the disinformation plan takes the idea that nothing should ever be leaked. Imagine you somehow find yourself a bureaucrat in the Nazi regime with the ability to leak the fact that concentration camps are being established. Shouldn't you leak this information? Isn't there a point when ethical duties to society at large overweigh organizational duties?
If you think not, tell me what is separating you from that Nazi.
P.S. Goodwin's law is a disinformation campaign to prevent us from formulating valid Nazi analogies free from digression.
Yeah, this is a loser for all Americans. The majority of the country didn't want this legislation. It was voted down in congress and they had to resort to some trick to pass it. The entire time the Obama Administration kept saying that this was NOT A TAX... that it was a Mandate. Now the SCOTUS says that it is unconstitutional as a Mandate, but it's ok at a TAX. So the bill that was passed was not only against the wishes of the majority of the people, it doesn't even work the way the minority said it would when it was voted upon.
Not really factually correct. A majority of Americans like a majority of the acts of this law. The 'no preexisting condition' portion is particularly popular as is the 'no lifetime maximum' and the 'no copay for preventative care' portions. The one part that more unpopular with most people is the 'must buy insurance part'. But the rest of it doesn't work without that.
Not really factually correct. A majority of Americans like a majority of the Affordable Ice Cream Act provisions. The 'unlimited flavor choice' portion is particularly popular as is the 'no sprinkles limit' and the 'non-diary option' portions. The one part that more unpopular with most people is the 'must buy ice cream'. But the rest of it doesn't work without that.
I'm not against the act, though I think your logic is a little flawed. Popular support of the act is hard to judge, especially because it is widely misunderstood and politicized. Still, people like some things the act does, while fearing potential cost increases. Only time can really tell whether the benefits of the act will outweigh the fears of high costs, as costs have not yet been set in stone.
The main point is that liking the ways in which something is provided, whether ice cream or insurance, cannot really be used as proof that you support everyone buying it.
Slashdot Mirror
And come ON, can you think of anything we as a species can do BETTER than kill each other?
Yes.
Your post makes no sense.
Romney would be much more likely to sign a Ryan Budget or a Ryan-like Budget than Obama would and Romney has endorsed the Ryan plan.
If he was, I think Ryan has decided to not being him back.
Paul Ryan proposed an additional 6% budget cut for NASA in the Ryan Budget so that he could increase DOD spending.
Sorry, it's more important that we kill each other than understand our place in the universe. Have a good day.
Yes, the answer is obvious. That will never happen and even if it did people would just jailbreak their computer in addition to their phones.
Windows 8 has gotten more idiot proof than usual, and that's what draws in people that don't already somehow have a PC.
Thing is, make something idiot proof, the universe evolves a better class of idiots.
Might I interest you in purchasing my toothbrush chainsaw?*
* Read the extensive documentation for a safe brushing experience.
Windows 8 is amazing!
Other OSes are putting real graphic design work into their icons, but not Windows 8. Slap a random white shape on a colored square and you have your program icon. This is brilliant, because it greatly simplifies tech support. When people call up asking how to launch something you can tell them "click on the white icon."
Just another great feature in Windows 8!
Don't buy it.
Déjà Vista
Windows ME-tro.
Bzzt! None of the above, thanks for playing!
The correct answer was Richard Stallman.
The jury isn't out on Windows 8.
The jury already delivered their verdict and it was the death penalty.
However, the electric chair software ran on Windows 8 and nobody could figure out how to use the new UI, so Microsoft will still be alive and kicking for years to come.
Wow...all that technical stuff...when I think the reason people are more likely to answer "Is this person alive?" with "Yes." when shown a picture is something else entirely.
The English language is a complicated beast. Often things are implied, but not outright stated in English. If you ask "Is this person alive?" with no picture, people assume you are talking about the actual person, so it is clear and they will tend to answer as you'd expect.
However, if you say "Is this person alive?" and show them a picture it gets murky. People likely aren't being influenced by the picture in the way the blurb states though. The blurb interprets the people's wrong answers as an effect of pictures influencing what people think is true. However, the much more obvious way to go is to understand that the inclusion of a picture creates an implied language ambiguity. That is, by asking "Is Bob alive?" you could be asking "Is Bob alive [in reality]?" or "Is Bob alive [in this picture]?" It isn't clear which one you mean, like the other situation was.
The problem is not "truth bias" the problem is language ambiguity.
This got me curious.
Apparently, according to different sources 50-100 plants produce caffeine in varying amounts, which makes sense as caffeine is an effective herbicide if you aren't trying to ward off primates with an inflated sense of self-importance.
Narrowing to California, the first species I found that California clearly has was the leaves and flowers of orange trees, though the only exact number I could find was "caffeine is found at concentration levels of 11-17. 5 milligrams per liter, mostly in citrus flowers.” California is a big orange-growing state though.
The other option I found was holly. Southeastern US varieties of holly are quite potent caffeine producers. Indeed, apparently ancient people's used to drink them like we drink coffee. I've seen these caffeine-rich recommended to Californians to use as hedges on some sites and while the zone map for the plant includes California I couldn't find out any info on how widespread the plant is in that region.
I wonder what other plants are rich in caffeine and also if normal plant leaf decomposition could get that caffeine into the water supply?
Actually, space is all in the English system. By a strange coincidence most of the aliens have 12 fingers, 3 toes and 1760 of an appendage we have no name for, so it makes the math easier and is more logical.
AdBlock for Firefox has no equal.
Except for AdBlock on Chrome or AdBlock on Safari.
RTFA.
However, it's the third link if you didn't read them all.
Defence agent Neil McRobert told the court that Duffy, who was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome when he was five, was in retrospect, "devastated, ashamed and upset" about what he had done.
Being a spectrum disorder, perhaps most people you know are a bit more functional? From the article, we have no way of knowing. Schizophrenic people can also restrain themselves from following the commands of voices they hear, but I am suggesting if we catch them having an outburst where they are yelling at their voices, that there may be a more effective method of handling it than convicting them of disturbing the peace.
This kid had Aspergers. That is sort of an important fact that I don't see being discussed. Aspergers syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder that is characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction. The lack of demonstrated empathy is possibly the most dysfunctional aspect of Asperger syndrome. So the kid, with a disorder that makes it hard for him to empathize with people, posted some words that were emotionally hurtful, e.g. un-empathetic. He is taken to court and convicted.
I'm sure he'll learn his lesson from his punishment — just like how all schizophrenic people stop hearing voices and all depressed people become happier after you sentence them with crimes.
Sadly, I agree. In modern society laws are frequently far too complex, numerious and counterproductive for average citizens to understand and follow, meaning all citizens are criminals to one degree or another.
I remember, for example, when I learned to drive. I got on the highway and followed the posted speed limit. I was informed by my parent I was driving dangerously and I was! Why? The speed limit was 55 mph but the traffic on the road consistently travels something more like 70 mph and traveling at the speed limit was a great way to get rear-ended. Thus, to safely use the interstate technically requires breaking the laws of the interstate. We get used to these paradoxes in day-to-day life and tend to ignore them, tend to accept them.
That's why one woman on a bus standing up non-violently to one small paradox means something. We need more people like her if justice and law are ever to be in accord.
Usually, laws are just. This is the extreme situation.
There are ways to dispute a law you disagree with. Disobeying it is usually not a good way.
The bus driver said to Rosa Parks.
Allentown is only a city in the technical sense of the word. ;)
The article states: Israel is an anomaly in this way. This anomaly will be removed if Iran becomes a nuclear power.
The person writing the article didn't seem to realize, this could be taken in two ways...
It is simplistic and likely untrue, but the information did play a part, even if a larger part was likely played both by economics and Mohamed Bouazizi.
A little bit of good is still good.
Police officer and Buddhist master, clearly.
Even less then this, the disinformation plan takes the idea that nothing should ever be leaked. Imagine you somehow find yourself a bureaucrat in the Nazi regime with the ability to leak the fact that concentration camps are being established. Shouldn't you leak this information? Isn't there a point when ethical duties to society at large overweigh organizational duties?
If you think not, tell me what is separating you from that Nazi.
P.S. Goodwin's law is a disinformation campaign to prevent us from formulating valid Nazi analogies free from digression.
Yeah, this is a loser for all Americans. The majority of the country didn't want this legislation. It was voted down in congress and they had to resort to some trick to pass it. The entire time the Obama Administration kept saying that this was NOT A TAX ... that it was a Mandate. Now the SCOTUS says that it is unconstitutional as a Mandate, but it's ok at a TAX. So the bill that was passed was not only against the wishes of the majority of the people, it doesn't even work the way the minority said it would when it was voted upon.
Not really factually correct. A majority of Americans like a majority of the acts of this law. The 'no preexisting condition' portion is particularly popular as is the 'no lifetime maximum' and the 'no copay for preventative care' portions. The one part that more unpopular with most people is the 'must buy insurance part'. But the rest of it doesn't work without that.
Not really factually correct. A majority of Americans like a majority of the Affordable Ice Cream Act provisions. The 'unlimited flavor choice' portion is particularly popular as is the 'no sprinkles limit' and the 'non-diary option' portions. The one part that more unpopular with most people is the 'must buy ice cream'. But the rest of it doesn't work without that.
I'm not against the act, though I think your logic is a little flawed. Popular support of the act is hard to judge, especially because it is widely misunderstood and politicized. Still, people like some things the act does, while fearing potential cost increases. Only time can really tell whether the benefits of the act will outweigh the fears of high costs, as costs have not yet been set in stone.
The main point is that liking the ways in which something is provided, whether ice cream or insurance, cannot really be used as proof that you support everyone buying it.