I was born 1985, I've been to Toys r Us less than 5 times in these 33 years.
There just isn't any point in a toys only store. Even without the internet toys can and will be sold anywhere. They're literally competing against the whole world. Well they were anyways.
Born in 1980 and have been to Toys R Us more times than I could count. While toys in general were sold in other places, TRU had way more selection and stock and even carried (in ours) things like RC cars/toys, trains, model rockets, etc. that other places didn't have or only had a very small supply of.
Going to TRU as a kid was a huge deal for me, even if we weren't well off enough to buy too much from there. It was just fun to see all the neat and cool toys/model/hobby stuff in there and when you're young, the store was massive.
I also had a KayBee toys in our local mall, but it was much smaller in supply than the TRU 40m away.
Ah, yep.. You're right.. That will serve me trying to/. while listening to someone drone on in my ear about some project they want me to be a part of even though the project has 0 need of any of my skillsets and the only reason I'm being asked is so someone else won't have to do the work...
"If you use anyone as a "fact checker" you are probably hopelessly naive."
Now you're giving qualifications to that statement that weren't present the first time.
Of course you'll have some topics that are of personal interest to you. But, your statement was a de facto if you listen to any fact checker you're probably naive. Which is why I said what I said. It's relevant to your first statement, which was a reduction statement. One person cannot possibly know all facts, so there are plenty of times you simply have to accept what other people say as facts, are indeed facts.
If you use anyone as a "fact checker" you are probably hopelessly naive.
So, the only things you know as a fact are things that you have personally proven? Even then, how do you know your facts are facts and not something else that happened by coincidence?
Otherwise, everything you know is sourced from a fact-checker that has validated the data as factual.
If you ask someone to respond to you, they've been told to respond by years of social conditioning from people in general (friends, family, school, etc). So, we learn that we need to respond to commands and not just ignore them. By this person not responding, it doesn't mean they shut off more than consciousness and it could very well be that the brain's ability to take in a verbal command, decode the sound in to words, string those words together in to a language we know and then see if we know what it means as a whole sentence/command and then choose to ignore/act, is a part of consciousness.
It's quite possible that person with that sheet disabled, did hear the sounds, their brain did understand what the words meant, but no further ability to interlink the command to the concept of response. It's not autonomic like other things would be, like tapping a reflex point.
damn, I already posted in this thread or you'd have mod points! That's a spooky interesting article!
Yeah, it's the "brings it all together" area that allows us to fully integrate all our sensory data and actually do stuff with it. Or, so the test showed in that patient. It would need more sample size to know for sure. But, if that's the case, then that gives people a specific part of the brain to look at and reverse engineer to "bring it all together" in other systems to see if i's the seat or not. It might be part of it, but not the actual seat.. More like a sensory integration bit that merges all our input together and sends it to other areas that actually have our consciousness.
It would be like pulling a fuse in a circuit thinking well, that's where power comes from vs, no you just interrupted the path.
[consciousness is] an emergent property of complex systems...
That's the current common theory, yes.
...meaning science isn't yet advanced enough to understand it.
Also meaning that said theory might be entirely wrong.
We are probably now within but a single generation of being able to make computer chips that might rival the human brain in complexity.... but I am skeptical that we will see consciousness emerge from them. I'm not saying that consciousness is magic, but I suspect it takes more than just complexity.
There's actually a procedure we've done to a live human that has actively shut off of their consciousness and otherwise left them awake.
Well, places like Chicago, a lot of people already commute in from surrounding suburbs. So, we'd be most fine.
The HQ2 site is actually in viewing distance from my office. So are 3 of our major commuter train stations and several local trains, plenty of busses and the 290/90/94/55 expressway interchange is next door.
I think the tax issue will be a non event for Chicagoans in the city proper either.
Make sure you ignore that resistor I placed across your tip/ring. Or that man down the way a little bit using a buttset. I'm sure he's not making LD calls.
Slashdot Mirror
No they are not, we vet our stories here
Fake news. Right here.
We either plan for it now or start buying pitchforks and torches. And oiling up the guillotines because we _will_ eat the rich.
I believe that Bender Bending Rodriguez said it best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I was born 1985, I've been to Toys r Us less than 5 times in these 33 years.
There just isn't any point in a toys only store. Even without the internet toys can and will be sold anywhere. They're literally competing against the whole world. Well they were anyways.
Born in 1980 and have been to Toys R Us more times than I could count. While toys in general were sold in other places, TRU had way more selection and stock and even carried (in ours) things like RC cars/toys, trains, model rockets, etc. that other places didn't have or only had a very small supply of.
Going to TRU as a kid was a huge deal for me, even if we weren't well off enough to buy too much from there. It was just fun to see all the neat and cool toys/model/hobby stuff in there and when you're young, the store was massive.
I also had a KayBee toys in our local mall, but it was much smaller in supply than the TRU 40m away.
Ah, yep.. You're right.. That will serve me trying to /. while listening to someone drone on in my ear about some project they want me to be a part of even though the project has 0 need of any of my skillsets and the only reason I'm being asked is so someone else won't have to do the work...
my bad
That's not what you said though. You said:
"If you use anyone as a "fact checker" you are probably hopelessly naive."
Now you're giving qualifications to that statement that weren't present the first time.
Of course you'll have some topics that are of personal interest to you. But, your statement was a de facto if you listen to any fact checker you're probably naive. Which is why I said what I said. It's relevant to your first statement, which was a reduction statement. One person cannot possibly know all facts, so there are plenty of times you simply have to accept what other people say as facts, are indeed facts.
If you use anyone as a "fact checker" you are probably hopelessly naive.
So, the only things you know as a fact are things that you have personally proven? Even then, how do you know your facts are facts and not something else that happened by coincidence?
Otherwise, everything you know is sourced from a fact-checker that has validated the data as factual.
and if the follow up will be Android PP
Yeah, we've not been that in years now.. Sadly.
Try riding the Red or Blue lines in Chicago and get back to me on that.
4.... "It's EDS 4."
Well, it all depends I suppose.
If you ask someone to respond to you, they've been told to respond by years of social conditioning from people in general (friends, family, school, etc). So, we learn that we need to respond to commands and not just ignore them. By this person not responding, it doesn't mean they shut off more than consciousness and it could very well be that the brain's ability to take in a verbal command, decode the sound in to words, string those words together in to a language we know and then see if we know what it means as a whole sentence/command and then choose to ignore/act, is a part of consciousness.
It's quite possible that person with that sheet disabled, did hear the sounds, their brain did understand what the words meant, but no further ability to interlink the command to the concept of response. It's not autonomic like other things would be, like tapping a reflex point.
So it could be the key part of the brain that "brings it all together", or it could not be. Definitely useful.
Well, if it's not THE center, then it's one more place we've crossed of as NOT.. So, that's useful.
damn, I already posted in this thread or you'd have mod points!
That's a spooky interesting article!
Yeah, it's the "brings it all together" area that allows us to fully integrate all our sensory data and actually do stuff with it. Or, so the test showed in that patient. It would need more sample size to know for sure. But, if that's the case, then that gives people a specific part of the brain to look at and reverse engineer to "bring it all together" in other systems to see if i's the seat or not. It might be part of it, but not the actual seat.. More like a sensory integration bit that merges all our input together and sends it to other areas that actually have our consciousness.
It would be like pulling a fuse in a circuit thinking well, that's where power comes from vs, no you just interrupted the path.
That's the current common theory, yes.
Also meaning that said theory might be entirely wrong.
We are probably now within but a single generation of being able to make computer chips that might rival the human brain in complexity.... but I am skeptical that we will see consciousness emerge from them. I'm not saying that consciousness is magic, but I suspect it takes more than just complexity.
There's actually a procedure we've done to a live human that has actively shut off of their consciousness and otherwise left them awake.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
LOL @Flamebait.. It's the truth. I don't really care if someone doesn't like it, but it's not bait.
Perfectly content he's tearing apart the Obama bullshit.
Well, places like Chicago, a lot of people already commute in from surrounding suburbs. So, we'd be most fine.
The HQ2 site is actually in viewing distance from my office. So are 3 of our major commuter train stations and several local trains, plenty of busses and the 290/90/94/55 expressway interchange is next door.
I think the tax issue will be a non event for Chicagoans in the city proper either.
Please, this is /.
Half of those characters aren't supported as input in such a field.
Yeah, clearly I'm an idiot and I've never actually tried to do something I just figured was built in at this point..
My bad.
Those are called catalytic convertors. They function well enough, like the tower does and not 100% removal.
Make sure you ignore that resistor I placed across your tip/ring.
Or that man down the way a little bit using a buttset. I'm sure he's not making LD calls.
Â
Try Alt + 248 if on a Windows PC.
Yeah, nevermind...
Â
Try Alt + 248 if on a Windows PC.
You forgot about Directive 4.
In the real world, he would never be able to erase Directive 4 and would always be a slave to the share.
Wow you actually bothered to create an account, just to reply.
City of Chicago ordinances:
https://www.cityofchicago.org/...
https://chicagocode.org/9-8-02...
Even Pedestrians have to obey traffic signals, which was my point. They also are not allowed to just blindly cross where it's not marked to do so.
Furthermore. When push-comes-to-shove, you can be fully in the right and still fully dead.
Arrogantly walking through a red light is still against the law for a pedestrian.