Memento is great. I actually found myself wanting to do things backwards after watching it the last time (things like reaching for the wiper lever and ending up with my hand on the blinker/light control that is on the opposite side of the steering column).
Since you liked Memento, you should try to find Christopher Nolan's first feature film(to my knowledge at least) Following. It's actually quite good and you get to see the beginnings of his playing with time.
I was thinking that whatever was shot at them disassembled the organic bits and they would probably be put back together through molecular rassembly or something like that. It doesn't fit that they would have been killed as I thought the voice on the unknown's radio said something about interrogation.
I just had to say again how you have to respect a show that gives you two references to a Stanley Kubrick film in two consecutive episodes. Leaving the series on a cliff-hanger is not such a good thing. For that, and because quality programming is hard to find, I hope someone picks up the last season. It would probably give whatever network that is a ratings boost that translates into advertising revenue.
On the subject of the weapon's effects at the end of this last episode: Perhaps the weapon did not work on the gold and diamond because it doesn't like to interact with those compounds? That's the only thing I can think of.
Also, a movie would be quite cool as a previous poster pointed out.
Who would've thought that human memory class would come in handy for a slashdot discussion. I'll say that your information is correct, since I'm assuming you are saying the same thing I'm about to.
Any information is better recalled when we attach meaning to it (I'm assuming you meant this when you referred to context). If you want to remember things, a one of the best ways to do that is to construct a story around what it is you want to remember. Visual imagery works very well, something like making a movie in your head ( I sill remember five words of a word list, in order, after a single exposure because we were using this strategy). Location mnemonics is also supposed to work well (take a place you know very well, like your kitchen, and, in your head, place the information you want to remember in various places around your kitchen. Then, when you imagine visually scanning your kitchen from, say, left to right, you can remember the information easily based on its location).
It also tends to be better to distribute your practice over time rather than cram, at least for long-term recall.
I should have been able to give a lot more information on this, but I didn't sleep much last night and my memory is not working optimally.
I hope all of those commas I'm so fond of using haven't confused anyone actually reading this comment too much.
Aside from the points listed in the parent, and my status as a fan from season one, here is another reason Farscape is great:
"Hi there" written on a thermo-nuclear device that is later blown up in a recent episode. This reference to Dr. Strangelove is excellent. The only thing missing was having one of the characters ride the bomb yelling Yeeeeeeeee Hawwwww (I could have those words wrong). Any show that references Kubrick in this manner (the only other one I can think of now is The Simpsons) deserves respect. Well, unless someone out there knows of an absolutely horrible show that does the same.
-- I'm not previewing this, so there's probably plenty that should have been said and wasn't.
I assume this will be lost in the flood of other comments, but...
I'll say that we will probably come to find out that space is really a moebius loop. I'll also bet that anyone trained in cosmology who reads this, if they decide to comment, will tell me why this is wrong in detail.
I am hoping I can reply to your comment clearly. My thoughts are caught up in rhetorical concepts at the moment, so my words here may not be as coherent as they should be. Please point out to me fallacies or unclear points present in the following.
I was not aware of the tapping of aquifers, but doing so and causing sink holes is absolutely a bad thing. I also agree that having back yard swimming pools, and possibly(probably?) community swimming pools and especially in this time of drought, is a huge waste of water. I also consider watering a lawn to be a waste of water. Sadly, I've no idea if this is a larger waste than swimming pools, but Arizonans are doing both so there appears to be an even more gross waste of water.
My main point was that they are using water already allotted to them. They are using it in an unwise manner most definitely, but it was already given to them to use. That is, of course, assuming that the water they are using was allotted to them and would not be given to other drought riddled areas further downhill/stream of Arizona.
Living in one of the drought stricken western US states, I don't like seeing wastes of water any more than anyone else, at least I'd like to think so. When I see someone watering their lawn, I feel like explaining to them that if people keep watering like that there will be less water to drink. Unfortunately, I am all too often late for an appointment and do not stop to do this. However, Arizona is not sucking the water from my state, at least as far as I know, it is running to lower elevations and the only thing I can do to retain more of it is build dams. Although, after looking at your info on the propositions to Canada, perhaps trucking is a viable redistribution method.
At any rate, I believe we would be in agreement that we could use some serious social education/engineering to decrease this tendency to waste our water resources. We do not need a pool in the back yard, nor do we need a green lawn. The informed citizens and government of Arizona should educate the rest of the population about this wasting of water and institute prohibitive fines for the wasteful behavior. But until they do, the water that is allotted to Arizona is theirs to do with as they will.
Also, I was not aware of the exhortations to Canada about water. That is not the way to go about things, and I agree that this would be bad for Canada. What the US should do is spend the money we're spending on lobbying Canada to fix our overuse problems instead of trying to enable them.
As I said, it was something rattled off rather quickly.
I was assuming that Arizona is given a certain amount of the water collected behind the dam (1/2, 1/3, 1/18, etc.) and that usage of that percentage of the water that was given to them initially was not necessarily having an adverse effect on anyone else (like using water that was supposed to go to these other people). I don't believe that Arizona would give the water to these others anyhow, so the use of water that was already supposed to be Arizona's and would not have been given to others is not necessarily affecting them. At least that is how it sounds at quick blush while attempting to write a paper on an unrelated topic. Though, I will agree with nano-second that having a pool in the back yard is probably not the best way to use this water. Neither is watering a lawn as far as I'm concerned.
Hopefully that made some sort of sense. My brain is stuck in rhetorical theory at the moment.
Just something quick, and i'm hoping it doesn't sound flippant(sp?).
People with swimming pools in Arizona are not taking water from anyone that is uphill from them. Afaik there is no set of pipes and pumps that could take any of the water from that elevation and push it back uphill to other places that are running short of water. Yes, it could be trucked, but that doesn't look to be workable with the limitations of capacity with the amount of consumption. Plus, they have a huge lake at Hoover dam on the Nevada border that I'm sure helps to feed them.
I'm not from Arizona, just realize that they're really not using up any water that could be used by me or most anyone else uphill.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up. I was, like you, hoping that Episode 2 or 3 would show us the beginnings of the Empire. After 2, I was looking forward expectantly to the turn to evil of the Republic's clone armies. We would see the jedi slowly realize that the armies were being used for evil and be decimated in the struggle to defeat them and the, now overtly named, emperor.
But no, instead we get some cartoon. Not that cartoons are bad, it just doesn't fit. Also, why this cartoonist? Why not the people behind Blue Sub 6? As far as the actual movies go, I can only assume that we are going to go from the final shots of the Empire's ships being filled with clone soldiers and taking off to an already established empire and virtually no jedi. With the way this is going, Episode 3 will have half or more of the movie spent with Amidala hanging out with Jar Jar and friends under water so the Emperor won't find her before Obi Wan can spirit away the children. Terrible
I wanted to take up the point in the article that many researchers are more interested in publishing than in solving the issues they investigate. I'm going to preface this by stating that I'm a psych. major and, as such, do not have much knowledge of the specifics of other fields, but I assume their requirements are similar.
In university settings, it is all about how many papers you have published. When a professor is first accepted to the faculty of a university, he/she must "publish or perish" for the first 5(+[?]) years. If you do not publish often enough in those first years, you are not retained. Things get better after you get tenure; you are not required to publish as often. So, it should not come as too great a surprise if people are more interested in publishing than solving the issues.
I personally think the requirements of universities should change so that we are not searching through a glut of papers, all saying many of the same things (or close enough). I am more concerned with the falsification of data, which totally throws everything off, than with a tendency to publish papers that don't necessarily solve the issues, which makes finding relevant research difficult but shouldn't substantially hurt the future of the field.
Sadly, I've not read all of the rest of the comments, so this might be redundant. oh well
An earlier post pointed out that the guy was selling mod chips for the PS/2 that would let it play, at least, imported PS/2 games. If the same guy made a chip like this for the x-box, why would that be detrimental to microsoft? It would probably help their sales if Australians could buy x-box games at a lower rate from other countries and play them on an x-box they picked up down the street.
Does anyone reading this find a flaw in this argument?
I was reading through the whole thread hoping to find someone that felt as I do, and finally saw this. I'd posit that you are absolutely right, and this does not go only for obesity. With anything, if one truly wishes to stop a behavior, one will take the consequences. If they do not, they did not really wish to stop.
If I am told that I must lose weight (a.k.a. stop eating so much) or I will die of heart disease/renal failure/having the weight cut off my air supply/etc., I will stop eating so much and hunger pangs be damned. I do not need liposuction, stomach stapling/shrinking surgery, or amphetamines.
There are some that use food as a coping mechanism, but the argument above holds true for them as well. You should find a better way of coping with problems than running to food. In the cases of people of this sort, there are instances where they just choose a different way of running from their problems. They have stomach surgery or are prescribed amphetamines and take the weight off. This, however, does not fix the underlying problem(s), and these people turn to alchohol or drug abuse because they cannot turn to food any longer. These people should just deal with whatever their problems happen to be. Yes, it is difficult and most likely a painful experience, but it is far better for the person to do this than to run away from such things and hurt themselves in the process. By confronting the issues they can save much physical trouble (surgery, detrimental effects of obesity, etc.), not to mention money (surgery, medical expenses from obesity related health problems).
It appears I've rambled on. At any rate, thank you Xerithane for showing that I'm not the only one of this opinion.
The amount of sleep that is good for any given individual is not necessarily that which is good for everyone. I would need to see the entire article, not just the abstract, to see if they controlled for variations in individual sleep patterns. Perhaps the people who slept 7 hours per night lived longer on average than others because they had always slept 7 hours per night; while those that slept less or more did so from some recent cause. But I've digressed...
There are cases known of people who slept very little, yet lived to an old age. "William Dement (1974) described a Stanfort University professor who slept only 3 to 4 hours a night for more than 50 years and died at age 80." Ray Meddis (1977) found a 70-year-old retired nurse who slept an average of 67 minutes a night and didn't complain about not sleeping more and didn't feel drowsy durring the day or night.
Too little sleep, compared to your normal cycle, can be bad for you too. There is a condition known as fatal familial insomnia in which people at middle age stop sleeping altogether. These people die 7 to 24 months after the insomnia begins (Medori et al., 1992).
In conclusion, I'd say it's best to just sleep as long or short as your body feels the need to, and you should be healthier than adjusting your sleep cycle needlessly. Of course I'm an undergrad, so I could always be completely wrong.
Appologies for any misspellings, I'm not looking at this as I type.
All quotes, pertinent info, and citations taken from:
Rosenzweig, Breedlove, & Leiman (2002). Biological Psychology (3rd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc.
Re:criticizing the gov't(and a bit on movie edits)
on
Collateral Damage
·
· Score: 1
Governments should always be fair game for criticizm. I find it amazing that I've heard none but myself and a few friends thinking of the possiblity that the whole Sept. deal was an inside job constructed to solidify political positions. Not saying it definately was, but to ignore that possibility just doesn't sit well. I've digressed, but the point is this question: Just because there is a war going on or something tragic has happened and the government has proclaimed a desire to eradicate the cause, should the members of that government no longer be held accountable for their actions? I should say that the answer is obvious.
On the subject of editing movies, which dumb ass executive came up with that one? "We're editing the towers out of movies to be sensitive to the people effected by the Sept. 11 attacks." Aside from the utter silliness of such an idea, Escape from New York w/o the towers, how is this in any way sensitive to the situation? It smacks somewhat of an effort to rewrite history. "What tradecenter towers? They obviously weren't there b/c this movie was filmed in lower Manhattan and there are no towers there." Would it not be more sensitive to leave these building in the movies? Give the people something they can look at and remember things the way they used to be. This used to be something prized, wonder what happened to this sentiment.
Don't know if I've made much sense, but at least I attempted.
Wow, something on slashdot I can actually use info from my biopsych class to intelligently respond to.
There has been research that winning any kind of contest raises the testosterone levels in men. Whether(sp?) that contest be a sporting event, a chess match, or even the percieved contest of being successful in chatting up a girl. Also, if the contest is lost, testosterone levels drop. So when you feel like less of a man after getting shot down by that one girl, you actually are after a fashion.
This effect even stretches so far as to affect those that are not directly participating in the event. For example, the fans of the winning football team will have slightly higher levels of testosterone compared to their normal levels.
I found it, and the class, to be quite interesting.
I've noticed hang activity on both linux and win2k with my geforce2 while playing multiple games (max payne..there are no words), but have only had it completely hang the system once or twice on the linux side. the win2k side hangs more often for durations of ~10-15 seconds and has only completely hung the system once.
this is annoying and i hope they have a fix in soon, but at least it doesn't happen all that often.
In short, yes, in all of your examples they are "clueless." I lack more than my fair share of 16th century French Realist poety and am, therefore, clueless in that area. I am also fairly clueless in many other areas and not so clueless in others.
However, I know I am clueless in these regards and would not even attempt to, and i'm not sure this comparison is equivalent, teach anyone about 16th century French Realist poetry or think I know what or how it should look or sound.
Scenario C:
programmer- "If you saved it, it can't be gone, and you don't have enough access to save it anywhere outside of your home directory, so just look for it in your home directory and subdirectories and you'll find it"
If they don't know what a directory is that is easily explained.
Also, the elitist attitude you refer to among the advanced computer users is evidenced in the other groups you mention as well (the advanced historians, mechanics, poetry afficionados(sp?), etc.). If I were to do something like try to talk to a historian about the Opium Wars with as much knowledge about that as the average computer user tries to talk to an advanced user about computers with, the historian would react just the same way as the advanced computer user reacts to the average one. Said historian would respond with the equivalent of "RTFM" unless some intent to learn more about the subject at hand was evidenced.
This seems to be a great idea. Of course I haven't researched the implementation behind the idea, but just from this overview it seems that this would cut down on paper waste as well. No more need to send out pages upon pages of product when one of these clients could dial right up and display the pages for the target person electronically. That in itself may cut down a little on environmental waste as well.
If I had the money I would definately invest in this. At the very least it would save my company money on the expense of sending out a lot of expensive paper catalogues and it would let me reach a broader market than just a web only catalogue.
If you can at all do so keep up the good work Jim, and here's to hoping you'll get some capital very soon.
There are some very stupid laws
on
Dumb Laws
·
· Score: 1
There is a law where I'm living in Colorado right now, and I don't know the legal wording of it, just that someone I know was brought in on it. Essentially it says that if you say something to someone that they consider insulting, and they assault you, they are liable for the assault but you've also broken the law by making them assault you.
Now I can understand this to a point. I'm certain there were people who would find someone without enough self-control to not hit someone because of something they said and say nasty things to them so the person would assault them and get arrested, but it just seems ludicrous to me that if you gave someone "the finger" for whatever reason and they decide to assault you that you can be brought up on charges as well.
Perhaps I'm not seeing the entire picture, but I think that making it a law was unneccessary.
That's the question. I believe that the motion picture industry is so upset because they thought they had finally found a way around that pesky pirating issue. People have been pirating movies for a long time on video cassette. Now granted I'm young and can't remember a time when there weren't recordable video cassettes, but I don't remember a huge uproar about people being able to copy movies from one tape to another.
It's essentially the same with the music industry example of cd's and mp3, I don't remember an uproar about the fact that people could copy music from one tape to another, but when they copy music from a cd and put it in mp3 format everyone makes a fuss.
This whole thing is just a new spin on an old issue, and the industry is shocked because it had such faith in its format. This is for the movie industry what the first mp3's were to the music industry.
On a lighter note, I wonder how long it will take for DVD for Linux to come out. If I could code worth anything I'd try to contribute.
*disclaimer* I'm not neccessarily advocating pirating of movies, music, or anything else, just asking why this is being made to appear as a new phenomenon.
At the risk of being redundant with the replies I cannot see, this is just bad. Though I'm not surprised that someone did it.
When there is a quick and easy way to fix someting and it's fairly intuitive, someone will find a way to say that they came up with that idea and the rest of the people that have been using the same method for however long now have to pay. I'm just surprised it took this long for someone to patent this particular way of solving the year 2000 thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Memento is great. I actually found myself wanting to do things backwards after watching it the last time (things like reaching for the wiper lever and ending up with my hand on the blinker/light control that is on the opposite side of the steering column).
Since you liked Memento, you should try to find Christopher Nolan's first feature film(to my knowledge at least) Following. It's actually quite good and you get to see the beginnings of his playing with time.
That makes sense.
I was thinking that whatever was shot at them disassembled the organic bits and they would probably be put back together through molecular rassembly or something like that. It doesn't fit that they would have been killed as I thought the voice on the unknown's radio said something about interrogation.
I normally wouldn't reply just to say something like this, but with no mod points this will have to do.
Being a fan of Lexx, that is damn funny.
I just had to say again how you have to respect a show that gives you two references to a Stanley Kubrick film in two consecutive episodes. Leaving the series on a cliff-hanger is not such a good thing. For that, and because quality programming is hard to find, I hope someone picks up the last season. It would probably give whatever network that is a ratings boost that translates into advertising revenue.
On the subject of the weapon's effects at the end of this last episode: Perhaps the weapon did not work on the gold and diamond because it doesn't like to interact with those compounds? That's the only thing I can think of.
Also, a movie would be quite cool as a previous poster pointed out.
Who would've thought that human memory class would come in handy for a slashdot discussion. I'll say that your information is correct, since I'm assuming you are saying the same thing I'm about to.
Any information is better recalled when we attach meaning to it (I'm assuming you meant this when you referred to context). If you want to remember things, a one of the best ways to do that is to construct a story around what it is you want to remember. Visual imagery works very well, something like making a movie in your head ( I sill remember five words of a word list, in order, after a single exposure because we were using this strategy). Location mnemonics is also supposed to work well (take a place you know very well, like your kitchen, and, in your head, place the information you want to remember in various places around your kitchen. Then, when you imagine visually scanning your kitchen from, say, left to right, you can remember the information easily based on its location).
It also tends to be better to distribute your practice over time rather than cram, at least for long-term recall.
I should have been able to give a lot more information on this, but I didn't sleep much last night and my memory is not working optimally.
I hope all of those commas I'm so fond of using haven't confused anyone actually reading this comment too much.
Aside from the points listed in the parent, and my status as a fan from season one, here is another reason Farscape is great:
"Hi there" written on a thermo-nuclear device that is later blown up in a recent episode. This reference to Dr. Strangelove is excellent. The only thing missing was having one of the characters ride the bomb yelling Yeeeeeeeee Hawwwww (I could have those words wrong). Any show that references Kubrick in this manner (the only other one I can think of now is The Simpsons) deserves respect. Well, unless someone out there knows of an absolutely horrible show that does the same.
-- I'm not previewing this, so there's probably plenty that should have been said and wasn't.
I assume this will be lost in the flood of other comments, but...
I'll say that we will probably come to find out that space is really a moebius loop. I'll also bet that anyone trained in cosmology who reads this, if they decide to comment, will tell me why this is wrong in detail.
I am hoping I can reply to your comment clearly. My thoughts are caught up in rhetorical concepts at the moment, so my words here may not be as coherent as they should be. Please point out to me fallacies or unclear points present in the following.
I was not aware of the tapping of aquifers, but doing so and causing sink holes is absolutely a bad thing. I also agree that having back yard swimming pools, and possibly(probably?) community swimming pools and especially in this time of drought, is a huge waste of water. I also consider watering a lawn to be a waste of water. Sadly, I've no idea if this is a larger waste than swimming pools, but Arizonans are doing both so there appears to be an even more gross waste of water.
My main point was that they are using water already allotted to them. They are using it in an unwise manner most definitely, but it was already given to them to use. That is, of course, assuming that the water they are using was allotted to them and would not be given to other drought riddled areas further downhill/stream of Arizona.
Living in one of the drought stricken western US states, I don't like seeing wastes of water any more than anyone else, at least I'd like to think so. When I see someone watering their lawn, I feel like explaining to them that if people keep watering like that there will be less water to drink. Unfortunately, I am all too often late for an appointment and do not stop to do this. However, Arizona is not sucking the water from my state, at least as far as I know, it is running to lower elevations and the only thing I can do to retain more of it is build dams. Although, after looking at your info on the propositions to Canada, perhaps trucking is a viable redistribution method.
At any rate, I believe we would be in agreement that we could use some serious social education/engineering to decrease this tendency to waste our water resources. We do not need a pool in the back yard, nor do we need a green lawn. The informed citizens and government of Arizona should educate the rest of the population about this wasting of water and institute prohibitive fines for the wasteful behavior. But until they do, the water that is allotted to Arizona is theirs to do with as they will.
Also, I was not aware of the exhortations to Canada about water. That is not the way to go about things, and I agree that this would be bad for Canada. What the US should do is spend the money we're spending on lobbying Canada to fix our overuse problems instead of trying to enable them.
As I said, it was something rattled off rather quickly.
I was assuming that Arizona is given a certain amount of the water collected behind the dam (1/2, 1/3, 1/18, etc.) and that usage of that percentage of the water that was given to them initially was not necessarily having an adverse effect on anyone else (like using water that was supposed to go to these other people). I don't believe that Arizona would give the water to these others anyhow, so the use of water that was already supposed to be Arizona's and would not have been given to others is not necessarily affecting them. At least that is how it sounds at quick blush while attempting to write a paper on an unrelated topic. Though, I will agree with nano-second that having a pool in the back yard is probably not the best way to use this water. Neither is watering a lawn as far as I'm concerned.
Hopefully that made some sort of sense. My brain is stuck in rhetorical theory at the moment.
Just something quick, and i'm hoping it doesn't sound flippant(sp?).
People with swimming pools in Arizona are not taking water from anyone that is uphill from them. Afaik there is no set of pipes and pumps that could take any of the water from that elevation and push it back uphill to other places that are running short of water. Yes, it could be trucked, but that doesn't look to be workable with the limitations of capacity with the amount of consumption. Plus, they have a huge lake at Hoover dam on the Nevada border that I'm sure helps to feed them.
I'm not from Arizona, just realize that they're really not using up any water that could be used by me or most anyone else uphill.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up. I was, like you, hoping that Episode 2 or 3 would show us the beginnings of the Empire. After 2, I was looking forward expectantly to the turn to evil of the Republic's clone armies. We would see the jedi slowly realize that the armies were being used for evil and be decimated in the struggle to defeat them and the, now overtly named, emperor.
But no, instead we get some cartoon. Not that cartoons are bad, it just doesn't fit. Also, why this cartoonist? Why not the people behind Blue Sub 6? As far as the actual movies go, I can only assume that we are going to go from the final shots of the Empire's ships being filled with clone soldiers and taking off to an already established empire and virtually no jedi. With the way this is going, Episode 3 will have half or more of the movie spent with Amidala hanging out with Jar Jar and friends under water so the Emperor won't find her before Obi Wan can spirit away the children. Terrible
I just wanted to say thanks for the insight. I know it's a waste of hd space, but I felt you deserved a thank you reply
I wanted to take up the point in the article that many researchers are more interested in publishing than in solving the issues they investigate. I'm going to preface this by stating that I'm a psych. major and, as such, do not have much knowledge of the specifics of other fields, but I assume their requirements are similar.
In university settings, it is all about how many papers you have published. When a professor is first accepted to the faculty of a university, he/she must "publish or perish" for the first 5(+[?]) years. If you do not publish often enough in those first years, you are not retained. Things get better after you get tenure; you are not required to publish as often. So, it should not come as too great a surprise if people are more interested in publishing than solving the issues.
I personally think the requirements of universities should change so that we are not searching through a glut of papers, all saying many of the same things (or close enough). I am more concerned with the falsification of data, which totally throws everything off, than with a tendency to publish papers that don't necessarily solve the issues, which makes finding relevant research difficult but shouldn't substantially hurt the future of the field.
I'm surprised anyone else on this site has actually seen this show. Quite funny.
"Remember, if she doesn't find you handsome, she should at least find you handy"
Sadly, I've not read all of the rest of the comments, so this might be redundant. oh well
An earlier post pointed out that the guy was selling mod chips for the PS/2 that would let it play, at least, imported PS/2 games. If the same guy made a chip like this for the x-box, why would that be detrimental to microsoft? It would probably help their sales if Australians could buy x-box games at a lower rate from other countries and play them on an x-box they picked up down the street.
Does anyone reading this find a flaw in this argument?
I was reading through the whole thread hoping to find someone that felt as I do, and finally saw this. I'd posit that you are absolutely right, and this does not go only for obesity. With anything, if one truly wishes to stop a behavior, one will take the consequences. If they do not, they did not really wish to stop.
If I am told that I must lose weight (a.k.a. stop eating so much) or I will die of heart disease/renal failure/having the weight cut off my air supply/etc., I will stop eating so much and hunger pangs be damned. I do not need liposuction, stomach stapling/shrinking surgery, or amphetamines.
There are some that use food as a coping mechanism, but the argument above holds true for them as well. You should find a better way of coping with problems than running to food. In the cases of people of this sort, there are instances where they just choose a different way of running from their problems. They have stomach surgery or are prescribed amphetamines and take the weight off. This, however, does not fix the underlying problem(s), and these people turn to alchohol or drug abuse because they cannot turn to food any longer. These people should just deal with whatever their problems happen to be. Yes, it is difficult and most likely a painful experience, but it is far better for the person to do this than to run away from such things and hurt themselves in the process. By confronting the issues they can save much physical trouble (surgery, detrimental effects of obesity, etc.), not to mention money (surgery, medical expenses from obesity related health problems).
It appears I've rambled on. At any rate, thank you Xerithane for showing that I'm not the only one of this opinion.
The amount of sleep that is good for any given individual is not necessarily that which is good for everyone. I would need to see the entire article, not just the abstract, to see if they controlled for variations in individual sleep patterns. Perhaps the people who slept 7 hours per night lived longer on average than others because they had always slept 7 hours per night; while those that slept less or more did so from some recent cause. But I've digressed...
There are cases known of people who slept very little, yet lived to an old age. "William Dement (1974) described a Stanfort University professor who slept only 3 to 4 hours a night for more than 50 years and died at age 80." Ray Meddis (1977) found a 70-year-old retired nurse who slept an average of 67 minutes a night and didn't complain about not sleeping more and didn't feel drowsy durring the day or night.
Too little sleep, compared to your normal cycle, can be bad for you too. There is a condition known as fatal familial insomnia in which people at middle age stop sleeping altogether. These people die 7 to 24 months after the insomnia begins (Medori et al., 1992).
In conclusion, I'd say it's best to just sleep as long or short as your body feels the need to, and you should be healthier than adjusting your sleep cycle needlessly. Of course I'm an undergrad, so I could always be completely wrong.
Appologies for any misspellings, I'm not looking at this as I type.
All quotes, pertinent info, and citations taken from:
Rosenzweig, Breedlove, & Leiman (2002). Biological Psychology (3rd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc.
Governments should always be fair game for criticizm. I find it amazing that I've heard none but myself and a few friends thinking of the possiblity that the whole Sept. deal was an inside job constructed to solidify political positions. Not saying it definately was, but to ignore that possibility just doesn't sit well. I've digressed, but the point is this question: Just because there is a war going on or something tragic has happened and the government has proclaimed a desire to eradicate the cause, should the members of that government no longer be held accountable for their actions? I should say that the answer is obvious.
On the subject of editing movies, which dumb ass executive came up with that one? "We're editing the towers out of movies to be sensitive to the people effected by the Sept. 11 attacks." Aside from the utter silliness of such an idea, Escape from New York w/o the towers, how is this in any way sensitive to the situation? It smacks somewhat of an effort to rewrite history. "What tradecenter towers? They obviously weren't there b/c this movie was filmed in lower Manhattan and there are no towers there." Would it not be more sensitive to leave these building in the movies? Give the people something they can look at and remember things the way they used to be. This used to be something prized, wonder what happened to this sentiment.
Don't know if I've made much sense, but at least I attempted.
Wow, something on slashdot I can actually use info from my biopsych class to intelligently respond to.
There has been research that winning any kind of contest raises the testosterone levels in men. Whether(sp?) that contest be a sporting event, a chess match, or even the percieved contest of being successful in chatting up a girl. Also, if the contest is lost, testosterone levels drop. So when you feel like less of a man after getting shot down by that one girl, you actually are after a fashion.
This effect even stretches so far as to affect those that are not directly participating in the event. For example, the fans of the winning football team will have slightly higher levels of testosterone compared to their normal levels.
I found it, and the class, to be quite interesting.
I've noticed hang activity on both linux and win2k with my geforce2 while playing multiple games (max payne..there are no words), but have only had it completely hang the system once or twice on the linux side. the win2k side hangs more often for durations of ~10-15 seconds and has only completely hung the system once.
this is annoying and i hope they have a fix in soon, but at least it doesn't happen all that often.
In short, yes, in all of your examples they are "clueless." I lack more than my fair share of 16th century French Realist poety and am, therefore, clueless in that area. I am also fairly clueless in many other areas and not so clueless in others.
However, I know I am clueless in these regards and would not even attempt to, and i'm not sure this comparison is equivalent, teach anyone about 16th century French Realist poetry or think I know what or how it should look or sound.
Scenario C:
programmer- "If you saved it, it can't be gone, and you don't have enough access to save it anywhere outside of your home directory, so just look for it in your home directory and subdirectories and you'll find it"
If they don't know what a directory is that is easily explained.
Also, the elitist attitude you refer to among the advanced computer users is evidenced in the other groups you mention as well (the advanced historians, mechanics, poetry afficionados(sp?), etc.). If I were to do something like try to talk to a historian about the Opium Wars with as much knowledge about that as the average computer user tries to talk to an advanced user about computers with, the historian would react just the same way as the advanced computer user reacts to the average one. Said historian would respond with the equivalent of "RTFM" unless some intent to learn more about the subject at hand was evidenced.
This seems to be a great idea. Of course I haven't researched the implementation behind the idea, but just from this overview it seems that this would cut down on paper waste as well. No more need to send out pages upon pages of product when one of these clients could dial right up and display the pages for the target person electronically. That in itself may cut down a little on environmental waste as well.
If I had the money I would definately invest in this. At the very least it would save my company money on the expense of sending out a lot of expensive paper catalogues and it would let me reach a broader market than just a web only catalogue.
If you can at all do so keep up the good work Jim, and here's to hoping you'll get some capital very soon.
There is a law where I'm living in Colorado right now, and I don't know the legal wording of it, just that someone I know was brought in on it. Essentially it says that if you say something to someone that they consider insulting, and they assault you, they are liable for the assault but you've also broken the law by making them assault you.
Now I can understand this to a point. I'm certain there were people who would find someone without enough self-control to not hit someone because of something they said and say nasty things to them so the person would assault them and get arrested, but it just seems ludicrous to me that if you gave someone "the finger" for whatever reason and they decide to assault you that you can be brought up on charges as well.
Perhaps I'm not seeing the entire picture, but I think that making it a law was unneccessary.
That's the question. I believe that the motion picture industry is so upset because they thought they had finally found a way around that pesky pirating issue. People have been pirating movies for a long time on video cassette. Now granted I'm young and can't remember a time when there weren't recordable video cassettes, but I don't remember a huge uproar about people being able to copy movies from one tape to another.
It's essentially the same with the music industry example of cd's and mp3, I don't remember an uproar about the fact that people could copy music from one tape to another, but when they copy music from a cd and put it in mp3 format everyone makes a fuss.
This whole thing is just a new spin on an old issue, and the industry is shocked because it had such faith in its format. This is for the movie industry what the first mp3's were to the music industry.
On a lighter note, I wonder how long it will take for DVD for Linux to come out. If I could code worth anything I'd try to contribute.
*disclaimer*
I'm not neccessarily advocating pirating of movies, music, or anything else, just asking why this is being made to appear as a new phenomenon.
At the risk of being redundant with the replies I cannot see, this is just bad. Though I'm not surprised that someone did it.
When there is a quick and easy way to fix someting and it's fairly intuitive, someone will find a way to say that they came up with that idea and the rest of the people that have been using the same method for however long now have to pay. I'm just surprised it took this long for someone to patent this particular way of solving the year 2000 thing.