You then must consider Canada. We have a very very similiar ethnic mix, but have lower teen pregnancy. Stats for Canada and the united States. Check the 15-19 range for the US and Canada. We have under half of what you have. As well we have ghettos and a comprehensive plan to support single mothers, more so then the states. I am a minority group that has some of this happen (chinese) and I work and interact with another minority group that has this happen rampantly (Black/Jamaican). And still our rates are 1/2 yours. Why? We have Sex ed starting at grade 7 in each and every school, catholic or otherwise (The new islamix schools most likly will not). Thats one reason there are many more, it's not black and white but it does help.
You primary reasn old viruses (RPC exploit excepted) spread so fast on Pc's in 1-concentration 2-the avarage tech savy of a Pc user is low 3-really stupid people doing stupid things repeatidly 4-a fairly permissive OS.
That is also their order of importance.
If MAx was main stream, you bet it would have the same issues. 4 dozen OSS develeopers look for exploits is nothing compared to 300k hackers looking for exploits.
to be perfectly honest I wouldn't mind 16x FSAA and 16x Antiscopic filtering, And have all that run at 120 fps on 3000x2250(theoretical limit where screen rez matches real life for most people).
Perhaps you should move? Up her ein my town their pretty relaxed about stuff like skate boards and roller blading. We have a huge river valley with dozens of paths near the river. We have the largest amount of parks of any town in north America.
It's Edmonton Albert, in Canada. Where the people are nice, the girls are horney(odd statistic, we represent the largest concentration of chat hosts in north america for the porn cam girls per capita), and the cost of living low.
If this is debatable then ask why the japanese don't have as high a rate of violence even though their media is argubly more violent.
And explain how Europe has low teen pregnancy and rampant sex init's media. They also have a very developed sex education system. Even canada has lower rates then America, we are taught about sex starting in grade 7.
In many states, there is legislation making it illegal to teach sex ed. In the same states teen pregnancy is higher then the national average. The states are freely available from states on the US.
This is just plain stupid. It's not the medium that people are concerned with, it's the content of some games in this new medium. I am 29, and I still don't want my kids to see blood splattered all over their monitor when playing games. That just doesn't seem like a healthy thing for 14 year olds to be exposed to more than is neccessary. Even if they no it's not real, it de-sensitizes them to it and makes it more acceptible. If the only argument this guy can come up can be boiled down to "Old people suck!", then it's really not worth listening
The bloody splatter and such aren't unhealthy. The same with nudity and sex. The north american culture is unhealthy. Violence in context is very very repulsive. Violence in movies is glorified and made to be something it's not. In real life violence has consequences. People hurt, killing someone affects not only that person but everyone who knows him. If you have a violent scene in a game that has repercussions, that has emotional impact for some characters, then it's constructive. But the garbage hollywood and the game industry generates has no value. in GTA killing someone has very few consequences. It's problbly be a very diferent game if it did.
As for sex, that type of stuff should be taught. We should know how sex works and whats "normal". They should known porn is fake, and they should leanr what you do, why you do it and the consequences if you don't take precautions. The last few generations of parent shave been very negligent in teaching this and thats why the US has a very high rate of teen pregnancies compared to the rest of the western world.
You mustn't forget that human perception varies and 80fps isn't 5 times human perception. There is a valid argument that while 24 fps is ok to show motion in 2d, we need at least 60 fps to show 3d motion without getting motion sickness, it may not be universal but I've noticed it when I play games. In older games 30 fps made me a little sick while 25 or lower made me very sick. 60 fps and I feel nothing. In newer games it's a little less pronounced but still there.
So 120 fps is only double what most people can notice.
The difference is at 1600x1200 the 5800 ultra and the X800 xt will still be going strong while the 5950 and the 9800 pro will drop to 12 fps. 1 fps if you have 16x aa and 16x asf for the older cards whiel the new ones will do a respectable 40 fps.
on your NVidia 16mb card- Buy morrowind, install and play it an look at the water and the enviroment.
Now get a 9600 XT(thei cheap) play morrowing with the shaders on and with soem aa and asf on. 2x shoudl do it. HUGE diffeence. The water looks much better, no jaged edges ever and at x2 x2 you can have max radering distance at 1025x768 without the annoying lag when you look around.
Have you been to schoo lately? IT does depend on where you go to school and to a large exstent wh you are in relation to the others kids, but smart people get teased unless their also athletic, then their worshipped.
Thats pure Jobs reality distortion field, Macs do have an edge but it's not a huge one. It's simply has a cleaner memory architecture and thus a slightly more efficient transfer of info to the GPU the CPU co-ordinates but it's the GPU who does the heavy lifitng. The edge is somewhere in the region of 1% overall performance boost in equivalent hardware and equivilent machines. which is very hard to get. Price wise their about equal now. And performance wise in most areas. Only graphic work with huge images does the Mac still lead. As for compatibility, you never mentioned what comps that games on. A G4 with a piddly Card will run it better then a P2 300 with a GEforce 4 ti 256.
Regaurdless it was a worse then mediochre game that looked great but played horribly. I never got past the first dungeon just becuase of sheer disgust. It distilled out all the good parts of a lot of other games and the left overs was item management/exploration. Nothing to get excited about.
wait wait wait. Thats a theological no no. The angels don't have free will. Humans do. Angels do not. they have no sex and all bu the seraphim do not have free will.
Oh and the (very real) possibility that neurons form together into a feedback or amplifier system. As a very simplified example - a single neuron can be put into a quantum superposition state of transmitting/not transmitting its signal to the next neuron. What actually happens will depend on the 'collapse' of the state vector. Subsequently, the domino effect of amplification will translate this quantum occurence into a macro one
part 1: Ever heard of chaos theory? yes I have, small events that cascade into larger events, however it relevance to neurology is not strongly suggested. why? because the brail has a high degree of parrelelism and redundancy. On top of this, chaos theory has a superficial relevance to everything but simple because quantum level events can alter macro level results does not mean it is a significant effect.
part 2:Oh and the (very real) possibility that neurons form together into a feedback or amplifier system.
Now this statement is silly. The very real implies you have no evidence but want to re-enforce your position. All things, events and ideas have some possibility but the liklyhood is the question. If the neurons are a amplifier or feed back system for quantum events why is this so? how would this come about? how would a biological entity tap into quantum events and why would anyone even bother? If the human brains does this, does a mouse brain also do this? does a insect brain? Whats is your evidence? Isn't this a over compliation of neurology, the current theory is the brain is a proccessor and this requires no assumptions, your theory is that it's a quantum amplifier for which you must assume the brain can interact with quantum phenominon and assume this as yet unexplored interaction is significant to thinking.
part 3:As a very simplified example - a single neuron can be put into a quantum superposition state of transmitting/not transmitting its signal to the next neuron.
Quantum super position? a signal transfers to a neuron only stimulates it, quantum super positions? thats meaningless gibrish. The choice whether to pass the signal on or nto can be explained biologically, what need do we to introduce quantum physics into the equation? A neruon rcives a signal and then depending on the state of it's internal biology chooses which synapse to relay the message or nto relay it at all, something that hardly needs quantums physics to explain.
part 4:What actually happens will depend on the 'collapse' of the state vector. Subsequently, the domino effect of amplification will translate this quantum occurence into a macro one
Ahh true garbage. You equate a sodium gate discharge of a electrical potential to a quantum excitation of some kind, then state in really overly complicated language that the decision to relay the message depends on the end of the signal, that upon reciving the electrical signal from another neuron, some quantum information is passed when the neuron comes down form it's super position. So when the neurone as fireing and passing messages, their not in fact passing messages but instead are trying to tap quantum information, and the sum of all of the neurons firing generates monitors some unknown quantum event thats makes us concious. Thats sorta complictaed when the prevailing theory is that the neurons function similiar to a n logic gate, where n is the number of conections. It's a much simplier ideas, takes less assumptions, has the proof that if you destroy parts of the brain, you change the way the brain reacts.
Now we know quantum physics is not intuitive but they arrive at those conclusions only when the prevailing theory does not explain certain behavior. What beavior does our current neurological theory not explain? Why do we need to rely of quantum contrivances to explain the brain and the mind?
They may or may not be close relatives. Straglers sometimes join. But the idea is that if something doesn't activly cost the individual much but helps all of it's species survive then it will remain n the population, it may not become the largest proportion but it will stay. For instance in sea gulls there is two responses from the birds to invadders 1-do nothing 2-attack The first is advantagous to the individual bird while the second helps the entire population. There is always a proportion that do 1 and do 2.
Empathy helps our species because it ensures that we can exsists as a social group.
My first post was my view that eugenics isnt' a bad idea, take selection into your own hands because I see it going somewhere I don't think will benifit us. However I'm also wary of eugenics because I dont' trust any government enough to implement it.
But the way I see it, the idiots and the creatins are breeding while the intellectuals and athletes don't. So we're clowing morphing into a race of hicks, lazy bums, and alchoholics (I'd say alchohol was a factor in 30% or more of all conceptions).
But yes. It's a dangerous is somewhat suductive idea.
yes, taken out of context I could see how you misunderstood the argument.
Of course lobbotomies affect people! but how the mind learns and reacts to stimulii is still unknown. We don't know exactly what goes off when someone sees the color red. Simple things to us, like understanding and recognizing scents, are still unknown to computers.
Again this is untrue. When you see red neurons in your visual centers fire due to information ariving from the pigments in your eyes. As for stimulii, that type of argument is paper thin because computers due react to stimuli like simple animals. A computer can use chemo-senors to parse out what in the air and thus smell, Our noses do the same thing. The mechanism is identical. Lobbotomies have been known to alter personality not just change learning. Some people are entirly the same in mental capacity but wholy different personally after a lobbotomy.
There are several major fallacies in your statements.
Firstly I have to say I dont' disagree that god caused it all, I don't disagree that we can't create something strictly from scratch. But occams razor is a guide not a law and second the big bang can be reasonable explained as the intersection between two 5 dimensional planes that exsist in a 11 dimentional univers which gives rise to our 4 dimensonal space and time. Thats string theory, there is some support for it. The big bang was the intersection event and we exsist only on the intersection.
As for ideas being things we create, I'd object and say ideas are things we derive not create. Our perception of the world fuels our ideas and thus are derivatives of it. Random ideas occur too but they too are causal, I'm refering to induced ideas like the strange ideas you get when you take drugs or have a brain tumor. Perhaps you'd liek to provide a counter example of a created idea but I cannot.
The next issue, is that you state man cannot create soemthing then give a list of sensory input, just being nit picky but thats nonsensical. it's like asking me to build a house with the spoken word "goatse".
As for your last point I belive #2, but there are more then two options. Some say Randomness (two 5 dimensonal planes intersecting) caused it. I tend to beleive my christian god is random and the whole universe is tending to be closer to him:).
For the group survial triats look into ants and other social insects. For them they have a higher genetic identity with their sisters then with their mother or with possible offspring. For them helping the hive helps their genetically closer relatives. Also pack mentality of wolves, it is not genetically favorable for an individual nto to mate but there is only one alpha male and alpha couple. They becaome subservient and supress their mating to increase the likly hood of genetically healthy offspirng. On the rest I agree.
this is exstremely tricky because survival value is hard to calculate. Here's a ridiculous example:
Lets say we can expulge any gene from the gene pool and promote any other, lets say we made everybody (over a few dozen generations) beautiful and tall, muscular and smart. Then comes a horde of groteque, invincible, and ravenous alien creatures that only eat things 6 ft tall or taller. Now that we lack any individuals with those traits or even those genes, well we're all doomed.
Although I think Eugenics sounds good. In the long run it's might be better having a diverse gene pool rather then a umm "healthy" one.
Rights are odd things. We all assume we have some, but who gave them to us? our governments? Who am I to say socio paths should not live, well I'm a citizen of Canada and it's nto illegal for me to speak thsoe works. What right do they have to live? who provided and enforces these rights. nwo imagine if those who granted those right decided to take them back.
Maybe it'd be a better ida to have nano-bots that sterilize undesirable people instead of killing them. Sterilizing say everybody with FAS. because mothers with FAs tend to have children with FAS who tend to be criminals.
Slashdot Mirror
You then must consider Canada. We have a very very similiar ethnic mix, but have lower teen pregnancy. Stats for Canada and the united States. Check the 15-19 range for the US and Canada. We have under half of what you have. As well we have ghettos and a comprehensive plan to support single mothers, more so then the states. I am a minority group that has some of this happen (chinese) and I work and interact with another minority group that has this happen rampantly (Black/Jamaican). And still our rates are 1/2 yours. Why? We have Sex ed starting at grade 7 in each and every school, catholic or otherwise (The new islamix schools most likly will not). Thats one reason there are many more, it's not black and white but it does help.
You primary reasn old viruses (RPC exploit excepted) spread so fast on Pc's in
1-concentration
2-the avarage tech savy of a Pc user is low
3-really stupid people doing stupid things repeatidly
4-a fairly permissive OS.
That is also their order of importance.
If MAx was main stream, you bet it would have the same issues. 4 dozen OSS develeopers look for exploits is nothing compared to 300k hackers looking for exploits.
to be perfectly honest I wouldn't mind 16x FSAA and 16x Antiscopic filtering, And have all that run at 120 fps on 3000x2250(theoretical limit where screen rez matches real life for most people).
Perhaps you should move? Up her ein my town their pretty relaxed about stuff like skate boards and roller blading. We have a huge river valley with dozens of paths near the river. We have the largest amount of parks of any town in north America.
It's Edmonton Albert, in Canada. Where the people are nice, the girls are horney(odd statistic, we represent the largest concentration of chat hosts in north america for the porn cam girls per capita), and the cost of living low.
If this is debatable then ask why the japanese don't have as high a rate of violence even though their media is argubly more violent.
And explain how Europe has low teen pregnancy and rampant sex init's media. They also have a very developed sex education system. Even canada has lower rates then America, we are taught about sex starting in grade 7.
In many states, there is legislation making it illegal to teach sex ed. In the same states teen pregnancy is higher then the national average. The states are freely available from states on the US.
This is just plain stupid. It's not the medium that people are concerned with, it's the content of some games in this new medium. I am 29, and I still don't want my kids to see blood splattered all over their monitor when playing games. That just doesn't seem like a healthy thing for 14 year olds to be exposed to more than is neccessary. Even if they no it's not real, it de-sensitizes them to it and makes it more acceptible. If the only argument this guy can come up can be boiled down to "Old people suck!", then it's really not worth listening
The bloody splatter and such aren't unhealthy. The same with nudity and sex. The north american culture is unhealthy. Violence in context is very very repulsive. Violence in movies is glorified and made to be something it's not. In real life violence has consequences. People hurt, killing someone affects not only that person but everyone who knows him. If you have a violent scene in a game that has repercussions, that has emotional impact for some characters, then it's constructive. But the garbage hollywood and the game industry generates has no value. in GTA killing someone has very few consequences. It's problbly be a very diferent game if it did.
As for sex, that type of stuff should be taught. We should know how sex works and whats "normal". They should known porn is fake, and they should leanr what you do, why you do it and the consequences if you don't take precautions. The last few generations of parent shave been very negligent in teaching this and thats why the US has a very high rate of teen pregnancies compared to the rest of the western world.
You mustn't forget that human perception varies and 80fps isn't 5 times human perception. There is a valid argument that while 24 fps is ok to show motion in 2d, we need at least 60 fps to show 3d motion without getting motion sickness, it may not be universal but I've noticed it when I play games. In older games 30 fps made me a little sick while 25 or lower made me very sick. 60 fps and I feel nothing. In newer games it's a little less pronounced but still there.
So 120 fps is only double what most people can notice.
The difference is at 1600x1200 the 5800 ultra and the X800 xt will still be going strong while the 5950 and the 9800 pro will drop to 12 fps. 1 fps if you have 16x aa and 16x asf for the older cards whiel the new ones will do a respectable 40 fps.
Try this demo.
on your NVidia 16mb card-
Buy morrowind, install and play it an look at the water and the enviroment.
Now get a 9600 XT(thei cheap)
play morrowing with the shaders on and with soem aa and asf on. 2x shoudl do it. HUGE diffeence. The water looks much better, no jaged edges ever and at x2 x2 you can have max radering distance at 1025x768 without the annoying lag when you look around.
Have you been to schoo lately? IT does depend on where you go to school and to a large exstent wh you are in relation to the others kids, but smart people get teased unless their also athletic, then their worshipped.
Lucifer was a seraphim, and Judas was a man.
Thats pure Jobs reality distortion field, Macs do have an edge but it's not a huge one. It's simply has a cleaner memory architecture and thus a slightly more efficient transfer of info to the GPU the CPU co-ordinates but it's the GPU who does the heavy lifitng. The edge is somewhere in the region of 1% overall performance boost in equivalent hardware and equivilent machines. which is very hard to get. Price wise their about equal now. And performance wise in most areas. Only graphic work with huge images does the Mac still lead. As for compatibility, you never mentioned what comps that games on. A G4 with a piddly Card will run it better then a P2 300 with a GEforce 4 ti 256.
Regaurdless it was a worse then mediochre game that looked great but played horribly. I never got past the first dungeon just becuase of sheer disgust. It distilled out all the good parts of a lot of other games and the left overs was item management/exploration. Nothing to get excited about.
wait wait wait. Thats a theological no no. The angels don't have free will. Humans do. Angels do not. they have no sex and all bu the seraphim do not have free will.
Ever heard of chaos theory?
Oh and the (very real) possibility that neurons form together into a feedback or amplifier system. As a very simplified example - a single neuron can be put into a quantum superposition state of transmitting/not transmitting its signal to the next neuron. What actually happens will depend on the 'collapse' of the state vector. Subsequently, the domino effect of amplification will translate this quantum occurence into a macro one
part 1: Ever heard of chaos theory?
yes I have, small events that cascade into larger events, however it relevance to neurology is not strongly suggested. why? because the brail has a high degree of parrelelism and redundancy. On top of this, chaos theory has a superficial relevance to everything but simple because quantum level events can alter macro level results does not mean it is a significant effect.
part 2:Oh and the (very real) possibility that neurons form together into a feedback or amplifier system.
Now this statement is silly. The very real implies you have no evidence but want to re-enforce your position. All things, events and ideas have some possibility but the liklyhood is the question. If the neurons are a amplifier or feed back system for quantum events why is this so? how would this come about? how would a biological entity tap into quantum events and why would anyone even bother? If the human brains does this, does a mouse brain also do this? does a insect brain? Whats is your evidence? Isn't this a over compliation of neurology, the current theory is the brain is a proccessor and this requires no assumptions, your theory is that it's a quantum amplifier for which you must assume the brain can interact with quantum phenominon and assume this as yet unexplored interaction is significant to thinking.
part 3:As a very simplified example - a single neuron can be put into a quantum superposition state of transmitting/not transmitting its signal to the next neuron.
Quantum super position? a signal transfers to a neuron only stimulates it, quantum super positions? thats meaningless gibrish. The choice whether to pass the signal on or nto can be explained biologically, what need do we to introduce quantum physics into the equation? A neruon rcives a signal and then depending on the state of it's internal biology chooses which synapse to relay the message or nto relay it at all, something that hardly needs quantums physics to explain.
part 4:What actually happens will depend on the 'collapse' of the state vector. Subsequently, the domino effect of amplification will translate this quantum occurence into a macro one
Ahh true garbage. You equate a sodium gate discharge of a electrical potential to a quantum excitation of some kind, then state in really overly complicated language that the decision to relay the message depends on the end of the signal, that upon reciving the electrical signal from another neuron, some quantum information is passed when the neuron comes down form it's super position. So when the neurone as fireing and passing messages, their not in fact passing messages but instead are trying to tap quantum information, and the sum of all of the neurons firing generates monitors some unknown quantum event thats makes us concious. Thats sorta complictaed when the prevailing theory is that the neurons function similiar to a n logic gate, where n is the number of conections. It's a much simplier ideas, takes less assumptions, has the proof that if you destroy parts of the brain, you change the way the brain reacts.
Now we know quantum physics is not intuitive but they arrive at those conclusions only when the prevailing theory does not explain certain behavior. What beavior does our current neurological theory not explain? Why do we need to rely of quantum contrivances to explain the brain and the mind?
They may or may not be close relatives. Straglers sometimes join. But the idea is that if something doesn't activly cost the individual much but helps all of it's species survive then it will remain n the population, it may not become the largest proportion but it will stay. For instance in sea gulls there is two responses from the birds to invadders
1-do nothing
2-attack
The first is advantagous to the individual bird while the second helps the entire population. There is always a proportion that do 1 and do 2.
Empathy helps our species because it ensures that we can exsists as a social group.
LOL. your arguments are frail so yu nit pick my typos. I happen to be working when I posted so speed is more important then accuracy.
My first post was my view that eugenics isnt' a bad idea, take selection into your own hands because I see it going somewhere I don't think will benifit us. However I'm also wary of eugenics because I dont' trust any government enough to implement it.
But the way I see it, the idiots and the creatins are breeding while the intellectuals and athletes don't. So we're clowing morphing into a race of hicks, lazy bums, and alchoholics (I'd say alchohol was a factor in 30% or more of all conceptions).
But yes. It's a dangerous is somewhat suductive idea.
yes, taken out of context I could see how you misunderstood the argument.
Of course lobbotomies affect people! but how the mind learns and reacts to stimulii is still unknown. We don't know exactly what goes off when someone sees the color red. Simple things to us, like understanding and recognizing scents, are still unknown to computers.
Again this is untrue. When you see red neurons in your visual centers fire due to information ariving from the pigments in your eyes. As for stimulii, that type of argument is paper thin because computers due react to stimuli like simple animals. A computer can use chemo-senors to parse out what in the air and thus smell, Our noses do the same thing. The mechanism is identical. Lobbotomies have been known to alter personality not just change learning. Some people are entirly the same in mental capacity but wholy different personally after a lobbotomy.
Try soem better arguments.
There are several major fallacies in your statements.
:).
Firstly I have to say I dont' disagree that god caused it all, I don't disagree that we can't create something strictly from scratch. But occams razor is a guide not a law and second the big bang can be reasonable explained as the intersection between two 5 dimensional planes that exsist in a 11 dimentional univers which gives rise to our 4 dimensonal space and time. Thats string theory, there is some support for it. The big bang was the intersection event and we exsist only on the intersection.
As for ideas being things we create, I'd object and say ideas are things we derive not create. Our perception of the world fuels our ideas and thus are derivatives of it. Random ideas occur too but they too are causal, I'm refering to induced ideas like the strange ideas you get when you take drugs or have a brain tumor. Perhaps you'd liek to provide a counter example of a created idea but I cannot.
The next issue, is that you state man cannot create soemthing then give a list of sensory input, just being nit picky but thats nonsensical. it's like asking me to build a house with the spoken word "goatse".
As for your last point I belive #2, but there are more then two options. Some say Randomness (two 5 dimensonal planes intersecting) caused it. I tend to beleive my christian god is random and the whole universe is tending to be closer to him
For the group survial triats look into ants and other social insects. For them they have a higher genetic identity with their sisters then with their mother or with possible offspring. For them helping the hive helps their genetically closer relatives. Also pack mentality of wolves, it is not genetically favorable for an individual nto to mate but there is only one alpha male and alpha couple. They becaome subservient and supress their mating to increase the likly hood of genetically healthy offspirng. On the rest I agree.
it's nto illegal for me to speak thsoe works ;-)
LOL, that's great, can I quote you on that?
Should say: it's not illegal for me to speak those words.
But apparently my fingers had different ideas.
this is exstremely tricky because survival value is hard to calculate. Here's a ridiculous example:
Lets say we can expulge any gene from the gene pool and promote any other, lets say we made everybody (over a few dozen generations) beautiful and tall, muscular and smart. Then comes a horde of groteque, invincible, and ravenous alien creatures that only eat things 6 ft tall or taller. Now that we lack any individuals with those traits or even those genes, well we're all doomed.
Although I think Eugenics sounds good. In the long run it's might be better having a diverse gene pool rather then a umm "healthy" one.
Rights are odd things. We all assume we have some, but who gave them to us? our governments? Who am I to say socio paths should not live, well I'm a citizen of Canada and it's nto illegal for me to speak thsoe works. What right do they have to live? who provided and enforces these rights. nwo imagine if those who granted those right decided to take them back.
Maybe it'd be a better ida to have nano-bots that sterilize undesirable people instead of killing them. Sterilizing say everybody with FAS. because mothers with FAs tend to have children with FAS who tend to be criminals.
Considering how utterly un-important most UN-delegations are. A few less of them shouldn't matter much.