"negative punishment", that you describe as taking something away, is most certainly a form of negative reinforcement. Negative reinforcement most certainly does not imply the removal of something. A slap on the wrist is negative reinforcement.
There are plenty of ways to discipline a child without hitting them. For example, negative punishment: take something away from the child that s/he likes, such as a toy, television, internet, etc.
Also keep in mind that punishment does not train behavior, it merely stops it. Training behavior is best accomplished with rewards.
Actually, negative reinforcement works best when it is administered promptly after the undesired action, every time it occurs, be it physical punishment or mental punishment. There severity of it is of less importance, but obviously can't be too light.
Regardless of it being a symptom or a disease, it is certainly a condition with some understanding of the causes. Diseases are often named based on their prominent symptoms.
Subject says it all. It really is time to start taking lawyers and other bottom feeders to task. Mentally ill people should be treated for their paranoia, not have it confirmed.
I have no problem with the lady getting assistance, but unfortunately the courts think they or a jury can decide what the cause is.
Two interesting paragraphs that might have been good for the summary as well;
A study by more than 270 researchers from around the world has found that just 39 per cent of the claims made in psychology papers published in three prominent journals could be reproduced unambiguously – and even then they were found to be less significant statistically than the original findings.
The non-reproducible research includes studies into what factors influence men's and women's choice of romantic partners, whether peoples’ ability to identify an object is slowed down if it is wrongly labelled, and whether people show any racial bias when asked to identify different kinds of weapons.
No, actually if you postulate the plant is put underwater, which it was not designed for, the outcome is quite easy to accurately predict. The problem was they placed the plant where it would wind up underwater.
In Chernobyl, a large nuclear disaster, not only did people die from acute exposure, but hundreds if not thousands of children had thyroid surgery (the "Chernobyl necklace"), and many downwind developed cancer as a result. Remembering that this paper states exposure beyond SEVEN DAYS is not considered, we already know that large nuclear disasters have both acute and long-term health effects. Claiming that they don't flies in the face of history.
That's right. And most of those that didn't die turned in to glowing mongoloids. We can't ignore that history.
So, if fighting car theft is the reason, will they agree up front to abandon the effort if a significant drop in car theft is not realized? I betcha not.
I suppose that possibly cleaning the blood could help reduce the body's auto-immune responses to whatever pathogens are present. Immune responses can damage things other than what they are intended for, including healthy cells.
Being one that watched a family member slowly die from septic shock despite doctors fighting to do whatever they could, I can say that this is quite a big deal. Just like the article said, all the doctors could do was administer different antibiotics and hope. This might have made a big difference.
I would like to see a list of the retracted articles. It would be interesting to see if the subject matter were slanted toward the hot topics of the day.
So if it was lower in 2009, and Uber didn't exist in 2009, it follows that you haven't isolated the drunk drive factor!
Also you then need to figure out what makes them not drunk-drive. If its the easy booking by phone, well taxis can be ordered by phone so the reduction in recent years might be attributed to the easy book-by-smartphone apps, not specifically the unlicensed nature of Uber taxis!
Likewise if its price, then maybe reducing the price of taxis is the solution, rather than replacing taxis with unlicensed ones.
It does seem that there are likely big correlation holes in this paper. The title should read "student paper suggests there might be a correlation between Uber and reduced drunk driving". But heck, why should accuracy matter when its good PR for Uber?
Economically, going to the moon was a failure. What i mean by this is: it lowered living standards for those on earth, because the resources consumed in doing it, did not create anything useful that allowed the same amount to be created.
It certainly inspired an entire generation, many of whom pursued technical careers. Guess there's no value in that.
Standing inside the fence of a rectenna array makes as much sense as going inside the furnace of a coal power plant. In other words, no sense at all.
300W/m^2 is the average intensity on the receiving antenna elements. The intensity outside the fence is much much lower. There's a buffer zone between the edge of the antenna and the fence.
That is not the configuration that most articles describe, where the antenna covers the full range down to safe levels. And it makes no sense because if you don't you are wasting a lot of energy falling on what is now a unusable zone outside the receiver, not to mention still taking up all that area which was part of the original point.
These space to earth systems are still a paper exercise. To state that "300W/m^2 is the average intensity on the receiving antenna elements." is not based on anything proven nor shown to be practical when controlling a beam over such a huge distance but still keeping the spread at a minimum. It may be possible. IF so, there is still a list of issues that comes to play when moving to higher energy levels, including significant EMI/RFI impacts. There is consideration of birds and insect flying overhead. etc.
It could be a wide range of things, we'll never know. Was they employee a notoriously poor performer already on notice? Was the employee offered help in an assistance program but he/she refused. Was the employee exhibiting behavior that could be perceived as a threat to other employees.
I'm not suggesting any of those is the case, but I've seen some crazy stuff in my many years of managing people.
UV radiation is the component of sunlight that burns, it is only a slice of the spectrum. That part of the spectrum is not 200 W/m2.
Microwaves interact differently with the human body than UV radiation, so the comparison would not necessarily be telling. My quick searches showed safe levels need to be in the range I specified, I'll admit I don't know the science behind them.
Slashdot Mirror
"negative punishment", that you describe as taking something away, is most certainly a form of negative reinforcement. Negative reinforcement most certainly does not imply the removal of something. A slap on the wrist is negative reinforcement.
There are plenty of ways to discipline a child without hitting them. For example, negative punishment: take something away from the child that s/he likes, such as a toy, television, internet, etc.
Also keep in mind that punishment does not train behavior, it merely stops it. Training behavior is best accomplished with rewards.
Actually, negative reinforcement works best when it is administered promptly after the undesired action, every time it occurs, be it physical punishment or mental punishment. There severity of it is of less importance, but obviously can't be too light.
Regardless of it being a symptom or a disease, it is certainly a condition with some understanding of the causes. Diseases are often named based on their prominent symptoms.
Subject says it all. It really is time to start taking lawyers and other bottom feeders to task. Mentally ill people should be treated for their paranoia, not have it confirmed.
I have no problem with the lady getting assistance, but unfortunately the courts think they or a jury can decide what the cause is.
A study by more than 270 researchers from around the world has found that just 39 per cent of the claims made in psychology papers published in three prominent journals could be reproduced unambiguously – and even then they were found to be less significant statistically than the original findings.
The non-reproducible research includes studies into what factors influence men's and women's choice of romantic partners, whether peoples’ ability to identify an object is slowed down if it is wrongly labelled, and whether people show any racial bias when asked to identify different kinds of weapons.
It amazes me how many people have never heard of Bhopal, yet consider Fukushima a great environmental disaster.
No, actually if you postulate the plant is put underwater, which it was not designed for, the outcome is quite easy to accurately predict. The problem was they placed the plant where it would wind up underwater.
In Chernobyl, a large nuclear disaster, not only did people die from acute exposure, but hundreds if not thousands of children had thyroid surgery (the "Chernobyl necklace"), and many downwind developed cancer as a result. Remembering that this paper states exposure beyond SEVEN DAYS is not considered, we already know that large nuclear disasters have both acute and long-term health effects. Claiming that they don't flies in the face of history.
That's right. And most of those that didn't die turned in to glowing mongoloids. We can't ignore that history.
Good point. So they are just inflating the actual price tremendously for PR purposes.
I suspect the payoff will be pretty short .
How do you see it paying off 'shortly'?
Is this a good way for Tesla to spend its investor's money, or are there better places to spend it when you have cash flow challenges?
Next up: E-Ink Clothing!
The E-Ink tattoo will soon render E-Ink clothing obsolete.
So, if fighting car theft is the reason, will they agree up front to abandon the effort if a significant drop in car theft is not realized? I betcha not.
I suppose that possibly cleaning the blood could help reduce the body's auto-immune responses to whatever pathogens are present. Immune responses can damage things other than what they are intended for, including healthy cells.
Being one that watched a family member slowly die from septic shock despite doctors fighting to do whatever they could, I can say that this is quite a big deal. Just like the article said, all the doctors could do was administer different antibiotics and hope. This might have made a big difference.
Thanks
I would like to see a list of the retracted articles. It would be interesting to see if the subject matter were slanted toward the hot topics of the day.
OK. Ya got me on that. But then how do you explain knee jerk reactions from spineless cowards?
I wonder if they can stimulate a knee-jerk response in this mini-brain.
many of those companies aren't eager to explain why..
Why would a company eagerly explain anything it is not intending to do?
So if it was lower in 2009, and Uber didn't exist in 2009, it follows that you haven't isolated the drunk drive factor!
Also you then need to figure out what makes them not drunk-drive. If its the easy booking by phone, well taxis can be ordered by phone so the reduction in recent years might be attributed to the easy book-by-smartphone apps, not specifically the unlicensed nature of Uber taxis!
Likewise if its price, then maybe reducing the price of taxis is the solution, rather than replacing taxis with unlicensed ones.
It does seem that there are likely big correlation holes in this paper. The title should read "student paper suggests there might be a correlation between Uber and reduced drunk driving". But heck, why should accuracy matter when its good PR for Uber?
Economically, going to the moon was a failure. What i mean by this is: it lowered living standards for those on earth, because the resources consumed in doing it, did not create anything useful that allowed the same amount to be created.
It certainly inspired an entire generation, many of whom pursued technical careers. Guess there's no value in that.
Standing inside the fence of a rectenna array makes as much sense as going inside the furnace of a coal power plant. In other words, no sense at all.
300W/m^2 is the average intensity on the receiving antenna elements. The intensity outside the fence is much much lower. There's a buffer zone between the edge of the antenna and the fence.
That is not the configuration that most articles describe, where the antenna covers the full range down to safe levels. And it makes no sense because if you don't you are wasting a lot of energy falling on what is now a unusable zone outside the receiver, not to mention still taking up all that area which was part of the original point.
These space to earth systems are still a paper exercise. To state that "300W/m^2 is the average intensity on the receiving antenna elements." is not based on anything proven nor shown to be practical when controlling a beam over such a huge distance but still keeping the spread at a minimum. It may be possible. IF so, there is still a list of issues that comes to play when moving to higher energy levels, including significant EMI/RFI impacts. There is consideration of birds and insect flying overhead. etc.
Exactly what side would the company have?
It could be a wide range of things, we'll never know. Was they employee a notoriously poor performer already on notice? Was the employee offered help in an assistance program but he/she refused. Was the employee exhibiting behavior that could be perceived as a threat to other employees.
I'm not suggesting any of those is the case, but I've seen some crazy stuff in my many years of managing people.
UV radiation is the component of sunlight that burns, it is only a slice of the spectrum. That part of the spectrum is not 200 W/m2.
Microwaves interact differently with the human body than UV radiation, so the comparison would not necessarily be telling. My quick searches showed safe levels need to be in the range I specified, I'll admit I don't know the science behind them.