Causation requires correlation. Because two things are correlated does not mean there cannot be causation.
To determine which is which, we need statistical methods. Look into the work done at the University of Chicago and the review done by the National Academy of Sciences (paying attention to the panel reports). This particular link has been shown to be causative. "Field trials" of new gun bans have shown exactly the predicted outcome as well.
Are you crazy? Teachers having guns in the classroom? Really? More guns is the answer is it? Do you realize how insane that sounds?
It may sound crazy to somebody who doesn't understand the issue, but emotional thinking isn't appropriate for sound policy. Study the statistics (do it yourself or read John Lott's work or the National Academy of Sciences report - especially the panel reports) and you'll find it makes perfect sense.
Strange isn't it that those countries with less guns and stricter gun laws have fewer deaths?
The main cause of gun violence in the US is the strident "War on Drugs". That's easily proven. You only need to look at Switzerland, where every house is required to keep a military-grade gun in the home (and some homes are required to keep heavier ordinance) and see that they have the lowest rate of gun crime to understand that correlation != causation.
More guns equals more people dead by guns. End of story.
That's wrong by a factor of 1:100 if you do the math (please don't be afraid of science). But why bother with reason when Hollywood-style scaremongering will do, right? Oh, here's a reason to bother - 20% of US massacres happen in gun-free-school zones.
Did you know that Israeli teachers carry semi-automatic rifles on class trips? There was an attempted massacre there. They changed policy, now there aren't any.
"Proud owner"? It's a fucking video card, loser boy.
This is often said facetiously. He could have felt burned. I assume it's for a $400 Radeon, not a $50 Radeon, since it's hardly worth putting much effort into the latter (just buy an Intel).
Or if you are irritated by a countries laws, don't do business there.
This is a good point. Let Europeans be limited to Apple Maps again and see if they demand a change to the law or not. They may well be willing to live with bad maps in exchange for higher privacy. Or they may storm Brussels.
Or perhaps the people most likely to go postal are disproportionately likely to be at or near schools, and have a lot of their hopes and fears invested in the things which go on at schools? This guy's mom worked there.
People get upset with their moms who work at all kinds of places. The question is not whether this guy had a connection to the school (he surely did) but whether the guarantee of no defense encouraged his actions.
Since schools have such a small percent of the population at any given time, and they make up 20% of all massacre locations (in the US), it can't just be a coincidence.
If somebody wants to make an argument that schools incite such hatred in people that they feel a need to lash out at them, I haven't heard it (but I'd listen).
Anyway, regardless of why people shoot up schools, I think the children deserve to have protection while they're there.
If you want "hard data", look at the number of murders per 100,000 people in the US versus other western countries with stricter gun laws. That at least *suggests* that just the opposite of what you claim is true.
No, it aggregates places like Chicago, which has very strict gun laws and a very high gun crime rate, with places like New Hampshire, with very sparse gun laws and a very low gun crime rate.
Compare New Hampshire and Illinois and you'll see a different picture - it does not make sense to aggregate different jurisdictions with different laws and try to draw conclusions.
For more data and statistics, check out "The Bias Against Guns" from your library.
In real life you see everything with no motion blur.
I'm sitting in front our our Christmas tree here. I just shoot my head side to side quickly and saw the light streak. There's a decay time on the light sensitive chemicals on our retina; I don't think motion blur can be avoided if the speed is fast enough.
TV companies made TV screens with different degrees of persistence to try and balance fluid motion
Ah, I recall seeing old posts here when LCD technology was improving about the screens being 'finally good for gaming'. IIRC, people are happy with 5ms LCD screens. But the geeks always point out that 5ms is really 15ms (RGB?) so perhaps that's the real measure. Let's see: 1/.015 = 66.666_ - perhaps that's why 120Hz screens are becoming popular; 60Hz doesn't quite cut it.
Thanks for the lead. Perhaps it was this? It's at least comforting that once in a while my wild speculation turns out to have been already implemented.:)
The nice thing for The Hobbit is that it seems the algorithms are applied in Post, so if today's algorithm is lacking, the blur can be re-processed in the future. The 8th Special Edition box set, no doubt.
Remember that it's not just your kid's math teacher who is a good shot that has the gun, it's also his failed cross-eyed jock PE teacher who just got a divorce and lost his kids.
Let's assume for a minute that the loser PE teacher does want to shoot up the school. He can bring in a gun from home and shoot up the school. Nothing is changed in the argument that it would be better for the other teachers to be able to defend the children from him.
Except when you're panning, for example. (There's a scene in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" when they're out in the city and there's a WAY too fast right to left pan, and it's really choppy.)
Well, the shutter is going to exacerbate that, but (not recalling the scene) would a human have clear vision at the same rotational speed?
Why should we have such high expectation of traffic ticketing equipment when we don't even do that for Breathalyzers?
In America, people have a right to be confronted in court by their accusers. Is it too inconvenient for mass prosecution of victimless crimes? Funny that.
In fact, you can get held in contempt of court for using such an 'outrageous' defense, distracting the court and inciting disorder.
If you say so. I've seen RADAR evidence dismissed using this defense in District Court.
In my own area, a Judge has ruled they are not legal.
That's good - in my State highway surveillance also is prohibited.
While most States were busy installing them, the New Hampshire legislature banned them. We have so many legislators that it's really infeasible to buy them off. I think this was the same year they told the Feds to got to hell on RealID also.
236:130 Highway Surveillance Prohibited. â"
I. In this subdivision, "surveillance'' means the act of determining the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle's occupants on the public ways of the state or its political subdivisions through the use of a camera or other imaging device or any other device, including but not limited to a transponder, cellular telephone, global positioning satellite, or radio frequency identification device, that by itself or in conjunction with other devices or information can be used to determine the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle' s occupants.
II. Neither the state of New Hampshire nor its political subdivisions shall engage in surveillance on any public ways of the state or its political subdivisions....
And in-court sworn testimony from the person who signed-off on the calibration and the calibration of that calibration instrument, all the way back to NIST.
We only give so many speeding tickets because we have a RADAR gun - people focus on what they can measure. I've been thinking of using OpenCV to create a tailgating gun. That's an actual danger, unlike speeding which usually isn't.
Irrelevant. There would be far, far more OTHER incidents (kids getting hold of the guns, teachers unable to cope with the stress of teaching and seeing an easy way out, etc) which would have led to MORE deaths.
Oh, so now teachers are the sociopaths and we don't know how to make a working safe? Lovely.
The hard data shows far more crimes prevented by guns than caused by them. There's nothing to indicate that this would be any different in schools, and quite literally - we have most massacres occurring at schools. It does not take a genius to see that madmen are incentivized to rampage where they can expect no return fire.
Sorry that reality doesn't fit your fear conditions, but we ought not base policy on your misunderstanding of how the world works. Especially a policy that takes away a teacher's right to self (and mutual) defense. I, for one, would be much happier if my kids' math teacher had a gun (in a safe) at school (I know he's an excellent shot). I'd gladly contribute to the school armory fund.
Oh, and the motion blur is still there, it's just that there's only half as much of it.
Which is the problem, right?
24FPS is fast enough to fool the brain into thinking it's not a series of still images, so that's how fast we process information. So, the brain must be conditioned to understand motion blur at approximately that frequency.
If you're capturing only half of the motion blur that people are used to seeing, it'll look weird. I understand that shutters exist and that vision doesn't have shutters, so I'm not arguing against 48FPS but they need to figure out how to capture 24FPS motion blur at 48FPS.
Somebody set me straight if they know more than my plain reckoning, but it sounds as though The Hobbit will become known as an historically odd-looking film because the technology was not yet mature when it was filmed.
So without the incentives, the payback goes from under 5 years, to about 8. Still not seeing how it's financially impractical.
Something like 40% of American households live paycheck-to-paycheck. The next bracket up has a small cushion but not enough to provide outlay for 8 years worth of electric bills. Then there is the class that's underwater in their mortgages.
Yes, upper middle class and the wealthy can afford to do solar installs, and they might be able to accept the non-ROI on it (vs. a simultaneous investment). But TFS was advocating this as a solution for populations hard hit by storms, which means "almost everybody".
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough, but you'll also find a dramatic spike in overall violent crime in post-ban Australia.
The proper lesson to learn from Israel is that arming teachers doesn't cause safety problems of its own.
Ever heard the phrase cum hoc ergo propter hoc?
Oooh, Latin, you win.
Causation requires correlation. Because two things are correlated does not mean there cannot be causation.
To determine which is which, we need statistical methods. Look into the work done at the University of Chicago and the review done by the National Academy of Sciences (paying attention to the panel reports). This particular link has been shown to be causative. "Field trials" of new gun bans have shown exactly the predicted outcome as well.
Are you crazy? Teachers having guns in the classroom? Really? More guns is the answer is it? Do you realize how insane that sounds?
It may sound crazy to somebody who doesn't understand the issue, but emotional thinking isn't appropriate for sound policy. Study the statistics (do it yourself or read John Lott's work or the National Academy of Sciences report - especially the panel reports) and you'll find it makes perfect sense.
Strange isn't it that those countries with less guns and stricter gun laws have fewer deaths?
The main cause of gun violence in the US is the strident "War on Drugs". That's easily proven. You only need to look at Switzerland, where every house is required to keep a military-grade gun in the home (and some homes are required to keep heavier ordinance) and see that they have the lowest rate of gun crime to understand that correlation != causation.
More guns equals more people dead by guns. End of story.
That's wrong by a factor of 1:100 if you do the math (please don't be afraid of science). But why bother with reason when Hollywood-style scaremongering will do, right? Oh, here's a reason to bother - 20% of US massacres happen in gun-free-school zones.
Did you know that Israeli teachers carry semi-automatic rifles on class trips? There was an attempted massacre there. They changed policy, now there aren't any.
"Proud owner"? It's a fucking video card, loser boy.
This is often said facetiously. He could have felt burned. I assume it's for a $400 Radeon, not a $50 Radeon, since it's hardly worth putting much effort into the latter (just buy an Intel).
Or if you are irritated by a countries laws, don't do business there.
This is a good point. Let Europeans be limited to Apple Maps again and see if they demand a change to the law or not. They may well be willing to live with bad maps in exchange for higher privacy. Or they may storm Brussels.
Damn, somebody got that diary on eBay for a very sweet price. A blog link or two and that could've been a few thousand.
Or perhaps the people most likely to go postal are disproportionately likely to be at or near schools, and have a lot of their hopes and fears invested in the things which go on at schools? This guy's mom worked there.
People get upset with their moms who work at all kinds of places. The question is not whether this guy had a connection to the school (he surely did) but whether the guarantee of no defense encouraged his actions.
Since schools have such a small percent of the population at any given time, and they make up 20% of all massacre locations (in the US), it can't just be a coincidence.
If somebody wants to make an argument that schools incite such hatred in people that they feel a need to lash out at them, I haven't heard it (but I'd listen).
Anyway, regardless of why people shoot up schools, I think the children deserve to have protection while they're there.
What do you think of Lott's criticisms of the panel review (largely based on the dissenting panel member's criticisms). Do you think they are valid?
Link just in case you haven't read them.
If you want "hard data", look at the number of murders per 100,000 people in the US versus other western countries with stricter gun laws. That at least *suggests* that just the opposite of what you claim is true.
No, it aggregates places like Chicago, which has very strict gun laws and a very high gun crime rate, with places like New Hampshire, with very sparse gun laws and a very low gun crime rate.
Compare New Hampshire and Illinois and you'll see a different picture - it does not make sense to aggregate different jurisdictions with different laws and try to draw conclusions.
For more data and statistics, check out "The Bias Against Guns" from your library.
In real life you see everything with no motion blur.
I'm sitting in front our our Christmas tree here. I just shoot my head side to side quickly and saw the light streak. There's a decay time on the light sensitive chemicals on our retina; I don't think motion blur can be avoided if the speed is fast enough.
TV companies made TV screens with different degrees of persistence to try and balance fluid motion
Ah, I recall seeing old posts here when LCD technology was improving about the screens being 'finally good for gaming'. IIRC, people are happy with 5ms LCD screens. But the geeks always point out that 5ms is really 15ms (RGB?) so perhaps that's the real measure. Let's see: 1/.015 = 66.666_ - perhaps that's why 120Hz screens are becoming popular; 60Hz doesn't quite cut it.
Thanks for the lead. Perhaps it was this? It's at least comforting that once in a while my wild speculation turns out to have been already implemented. :)
The nice thing for The Hobbit is that it seems the algorithms are applied in Post, so if today's algorithm is lacking, the blur can be re-processed in the future. The 8th Special Edition box set, no doubt.
Remember that it's not just your kid's math teacher who is a good shot that has the gun, it's also his failed cross-eyed jock PE teacher who just got a divorce and lost his kids.
Let's assume for a minute that the loser PE teacher does want to shoot up the school. He can bring in a gun from home and shoot up the school. Nothing is changed in the argument that it would be better for the other teachers to be able to defend the children from him.
Except when you're panning, for example. (There's a scene in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" when they're out in the city and there's a WAY too fast right to left pan, and it's really choppy.)
Well, the shutter is going to exacerbate that, but (not recalling the scene) would a human have clear vision at the same rotational speed?
Why should we have such high expectation of traffic ticketing equipment when we don't even do that for Breathalyzers?
In America, people have a right to be confronted in court by their accusers. Is it too inconvenient for mass prosecution of victimless crimes? Funny that.
In fact, you can get held in contempt of court for using such an 'outrageous' defense, distracting the court and inciting disorder.
If you say so. I've seen RADAR evidence dismissed using this defense in District Court.
In my own area, a Judge has ruled they are not legal.
That's good - in my State highway surveillance also is prohibited.
While most States were busy installing them, the New Hampshire legislature banned them. We have so many legislators that it's really infeasible to buy them off. I think this was the same year they told the Feds to got to hell on RealID also.
But that would increase safety at the cost of reducing State revenues. ;)
Actually, this might cause the soccer moms to go insane demanding 24x7 speed traps on every road in town.
can't provide recent calibration test records.
And in-court sworn testimony from the person who signed-off on the calibration and the calibration of that calibration instrument, all the way back to NIST.
We only give so many speeding tickets because we have a RADAR gun - people focus on what they can measure. I've been thinking of using OpenCV to create a tailgating gun. That's an actual danger, unlike speeding which usually isn't.
That's wonderful, thanks. It would be great if they can develop a business model that allows everybody to participate!
Irrelevant. There would be far, far more OTHER incidents (kids getting hold of the guns, teachers unable to cope with the stress of teaching and seeing an easy way out, etc) which would have led to MORE deaths.
Oh, so now teachers are the sociopaths and we don't know how to make a working safe? Lovely.
The hard data shows far more crimes prevented by guns than caused by them. There's nothing to indicate that this would be any different in schools, and quite literally - we have most massacres occurring at schools. It does not take a genius to see that madmen are incentivized to rampage where they can expect no return fire.
Sorry that reality doesn't fit your fear conditions, but we ought not base policy on your misunderstanding of how the world works. Especially a policy that takes away a teacher's right to self (and mutual) defense. I, for one, would be much happier if my kids' math teacher had a gun (in a safe) at school (I know he's an excellent shot). I'd gladly contribute to the school armory fund.
Oh, and the motion blur is still there, it's just that there's only half as much of it.
Which is the problem, right?
24FPS is fast enough to fool the brain into thinking it's not a series of still images, so that's how fast we process information. So, the brain must be conditioned to understand motion blur at approximately that frequency.
If you're capturing only half of the motion blur that people are used to seeing, it'll look weird. I understand that shutters exist and that vision doesn't have shutters, so I'm not arguing against 48FPS but they need to figure out how to capture 24FPS motion blur at 48FPS.
Somebody set me straight if they know more than my plain reckoning, but it sounds as though The Hobbit will become known as an historically odd-looking film because the technology was not yet mature when it was filmed.
That, and it makes me think there's probably a hidden '23' in the plot that I can't see because of the colors they chose.
Fair point on the corporations, but don't we need people to have a place to go to work too?
current energy providers that have to offset their carbon footprint.
Who pass their costs directly on to ratepayers. That's just an extra level of indirection.
The "crazy lady" and "no apparent reason" parts of my last post was pretty important.
What's the harm that's befalling you that justifies the initiation of violence against such a person?
So without the incentives, the payback goes from under 5 years, to about 8. Still not seeing how it's financially impractical.
Something like 40% of American households live paycheck-to-paycheck. The next bracket up has a small cushion but not enough to provide outlay for 8 years worth of electric bills. Then there is the class that's underwater in their mortgages.
Yes, upper middle class and the wealthy can afford to do solar installs, and they might be able to accept the non-ROI on it (vs. a simultaneous investment). But TFS was advocating this as a solution for populations hard hit by storms, which means "almost everybody".
Thanks everybody. I found a Seasonic "Gold" that uses Japcaps and solid ceramics which sounds promising.