Having said all that, the MAIN problem with this man is stupidity.
If the point is deterrence and something FOR SOCIETY, than I can't see why any more than 6 months is reasonable. Prison is horrible and nobody in their right mind wants to be there -- despite the blather of people who don't expect to go who are "tough on crime".
I want crazy people who are going to kill me and rich people who abuse power in prison -- that's it. If we closed half of them this country would be headed in the right direction.
If the guy were SMART, he wouldn't be going to jail. And Jail seems to just be a place for POOR or STUPID. Everybody else just contributes a lot of money to the legal system.
Seems really sad. It's not like these people make a HUGE difference to profits. Only companies can charge for "potential damages" and have to show real damages.
However, if you went blind because of Core Exit in the Gulf, you better keep your doctor's receipts.
Woz was very brilliant but he wasn't very practical.
Steve Jobs was a genius in his own right, but not necessarily the hacker/engineer of Woz -- but he worked very closely with design engineers.
His name is on hundreds of patents and that's not because he sat back and just signed them.
Woz alone would never have created anything like Apple, and Steve Jobs without Woz could not have either -- in life, we can't be good at everything, and it's a perfect storm if you can find people who can help you where you are weak.
But don't compare Jobs to Balmer -- that's unfair and ridiculous.
Step #2, Copyright their openly shared work and then sue them.
Step #3, Hire a hacker to steal CP/M and reelable the drive letters, then repeat the "steal IP and then sue them" procedure
Step #4, Repeat the taking of other's ideas and then buy their stock when it collapses then stop suing yourself.
Step #5, Act like a good lawyer repeatedly and have everyone call you a geek.
Step #6, Retire in luxury and donate some money to some causes instead of pointing out that a thousand other millionaires might have allowed other people to feel achievement rather than put someone on a pedestal who was just a savvy predatory capitalist.
So this is it then, we've accepted that when the grizzled wild eyed man comes from the bowls of some mega corp and screams; "Soylent Green is PEOPLE!" That he will then add, with no change in tempo; "...And as a result, we'd like to offer our customers a 30% discount on burgers."
We're all on board with this because if we don't upsell everyone's dog, at all times, we don't get any burgers, even if they are made of grandma.
OK, so it's kind of like Crossover Games -- it creates a wrapper with everything that an app (game) needs from an OS, but doesn't require the entire OS.
You are basically then allocating memory and feeding tasks to the wrapper without expending resources you don't need. To describe what it can and cannot do, all you can say is; "it depends."
That's if you accept what the Corporate PR said about the Exxon Valdez -- and you ignore the 1000x incidents like this that get no press.
The on solar incident that is killing birds also doesn't have the "unknown unknowns' there aren't that many unintended consequences down the line.
The Valdez spill continues to have SOME ecological impact. It also wasn't cause by a drunken sea captain - that was the cover story that they adopted and likely the captain got compensated for. The COMPANY POLICY was that they turned off all the radar and sonar systems that they PROMISED the Inuit that they would have on to protect the wild life. The Inuit went for protection of wildlife, over levying a large toll on this profit making venture.
Exxon saved money paying for the trial and underpaying and stalling the payouts -- some people just died of old age waiting to collect. Having to pay for all the safety procedures was more expensive than a guaranteed cataclysm.
I just wanted to point that out while all the pro oil and pro nuclear people gloat about extrapolating bird deaths that someone admitted to vs. bird deaths that PR agencies are never going to admit to. We pay trillions to a military to procure oil profits and we will be paying for 2000 years to safeguard mothballed nuclear plants and so I'm going to debate people on "cost of Kilowatt" when all the stats are lies and damn lies that we compare our apples and oranges to.
We do not really know the cost of most of these dirty fuels, but we do hear a lot of happy talk about it and comparisons to "worst case scenarios" for alternative energy. Birds killed by concentrated light -- I'm so surprised! Put up some fake owls on poles -- impact reduced.
My guess is the metal fatigue is being cause by radiation. Mars does not have the atmosphere and magnetosphere of Earth (no news flash here). So maybe it's just a case where cosmic radiation causes metal fatigue and we didn't know that -- or perhaps it's SPECIFIC to the type of allow being used.
"knee jerking white knight mangina useful idiots swooping in"
Nobody would call you a hater -- to your face, within range of your shotgun which is reasonably attached to the gun rack on the side of your laptop. Nobody.
Since I'm on the internet, I'll just say; "it's a private website, and they can have any stupid policy they want." Just saying. Just calmly saying with no anti or pro intent. I'm putting down my pen -- it's just a pen.
> However I would really hope the actual dangerous stuff isn't on the same network that allows any sort of internet access.
You spelled Nuclear correctly, but if you want the DOH (Department Of Hope), it's down the hall between the DOWT (Department Of Wishful Thinking) and OMGTWB (Oh My God-That Went Boom!)
No, there is a "nearly free" lunch if you are a multinational corporation or an executive attached to one.
The REAL average tax rate of fortune 500 companies is 13%. That's what Mitt Romney pays -- well, the income we KNOW about.
The last stat I looked at showed that the government paid around 52% of all medical expenses. And administrative costs at hospitals were around 42%.
What should we learn from this? In the US our cost is about twice to four times as much for healthcare as other civilized countries. More than half of this money is just going into the pockets of insurance companies, drug companies (charging more here than they do abroad and drugs that cost pennies to cows cost dollars to humans). HMOs and Hospitals. There are middle men in the equation.
The blame is getting spread around, but it's all about who gets the money. And it isn't the doctors or the patients -- the people actually involved.
We already have paid more than enough for Universal Health care, but there are corporations and wealthy that have removed their money from the system and there are fat cats making the money and getting us to look to blame the wrong parites. Why would they want to SOLVE this situation -- the FREE LUNCH is working out great for a lot of people with a lot of money.
I couldn't agree more. In an insane world, the sane blogger must appear as a troll!
Huffingtonpost.com forced a policy change that required a Facebook login. I don't want my opinions to tag me, like my credit rating. Eventually, if I've got any opinions that don't follow the "common and popular" I can create a self-reinforcing negative reputation.
Having what you really think follow you isn't good for being employed. And being unemployed isn't good for a credit rating. And a bad credit rating means insurance costs more. It's a really effective way to make dissidents "non persons" over time.
Anonymity on the internet is the last refuge of Democracy. If we cannot protest and voice our complaints anonymously -- then the only people who will get good reputations and jobs will be those that agree with the status quo.
I think the greatest speed limitation now is our "computing dimensions" -- we are still using binary logic in the computer. For instance, if we moved to optical computing -- sure the structures would get larger, and there are density issues, but if you can create a binary logic gate for each color, your "dimension" of computing is limited only by the frequencies you can discern. You add massive parallelism.
Now if we can move from binary logic at the same time, more computing work can get done per cpu cycle. In this case, the main limitation is coming up with a new computer logic to accommodate more than an off/on state.
And for data storage, holographic also is less "dense" than current hard drives, but you can add angles, and so more data can be stored in the same location.
I remember seeing a news story about a train conductor who "took marijuana and caused a deadly crash." They also mentioned, almost as a footnote near the end of the story that there were nearly 24 empty Miller Lite beer cans.
So I think we can't rule out something else that could have caused the malady.
But if this is 1/700,000 -- you are below the danger level of side effects to Aspirin. Peanuts are legal and they can potentially kill more people.
Now we might put a warning label so people can look for the side effects, but this doesn't seem like a threat above "slipping on rubber ducky". Other than paranoia, this is about the third time I've heard of a person almost destroyed by MJ. There are many legal things that are far more dangerous.
If you have a trillion cameras all operating in sequence such that they are triggered exactly so one activates a trillionth of a second after the other, than you've got exactly the same information via speed of light as just one camera. The only question is how much light each device is sampling. The shorter the time window, the more sensitive the measurement of light.
But I don't see any problem with speed of light; you are just sampling what hits the sensor at a faster rate.
I'm just wondering who would sit around for a few weeks to watch a humming bird beat its wings a few times. We need some hyperbolic metaphors so we can comprehend how fast this is...
But I have to admit that if my intentions were ever good, I wasn't actually marketing anymore. I'm glad that he's apologetic, but he was in marketing. You don't swing a pitchfork in Hell and pretend you don't work there.
The "racial differences" for athletic ability are also incredibly over rated. You take anyone and start them on a program of wind sprints from the age of 4 and they are going to do better than the average couch potato. So if we try and factor out "given the same situation" then there is a minor difference -- we have only factored for the "rate of improvement given certain inputs." We don't know what "peak ability is" because most of us don't ever approach our peak.
If I'd stayed a book worm recluse like I was when I was ten, and I saw the only value in this world as "being smart", I'd be very, very educated as far as books are concerned.
It's not that we can't find a CLEAR difference with tests, but there are so many cultural differences that make the difference on athletic performance and intelligence it makes the other points moot. A few studies with adoption notwithstanding.
The genetics between humans other than a few aboriginal groups, is so minor as to be inconsequential. It's not like we are talking about Poodles and Retrievers. It's exactly like "all humans are poodles" and we are arguing superiority based on hair style.
One day our kids will be learning twice as much as they do today. New techniques and possibly modifications will be employed. Any on of the kids from 200 years in the future would put people today in the dust. So maybe we need to find better educational techniques based on culture, and let kids gravitate towards what works best.
The main problem I have with these IQ debates is; we don't cover all forms of intelligence, and we use the results as excuses to not do our best. I think that's why some people are so "PC" about the issue -- because every group "on top" in human history has tried to make arguments for why the people on top are naturally superior.
For instance; The royalty probably had higher IQ's than the average peasantry in medieval Europe and likely because of diet. Some poles used to do IQ tests before people could vote, and the questions were entirely designed to be easy for a caucasian.
There is a difference, but I don't think people should be surpassed that others get upset, or that people call make valid points of larger differences in opportunity, and more recent "environmental history." What we think is "genetic IQ" may more likely be adaptive genes which can change one generation to the next. For instance, if your parents were weight lifters -- you might be better at lifting weights as certain genes are turned on. I expect we will see a lot more real science backing up the notion that humans and other animals that have to adapt to wildly changing conditions, can have massive changes in genetics based on recent family history.
For about 20 years I figured (before the anthropologists made it gospel), that we didn't kill off Neanderthals but interbred with them. Much of the superior Neanderthal strength however was bred out. Why? I figure the reason the weaker branch outbreak the genes for strength during an ice age was due to "metabolism." Super strong muscles even if the creature is smart requires more food.
Humans are about the weakest mammal pound for pound, but we also seem to have nearly the lowest metabolism. Only the Armadillo has lower average body temperature and it's barely a proper mammal.
Humans learned to cook to improve digestion and concentrate energy in food, and we also turned into omnivorous wimps to survive on what an animal a third our size requires -- and meanwhile manage to carry around a large brain. Something had to go. If this is accepted theory or not today, I haven't checked.
As a person who is actually Caucasian and was found to have genius IQ -- I'm going to dispute the way racial intelligence is computed. For one thing, I experienced a lot of ADD and ADHD as a child -- and later it seemed I "grew out of it" but the real reason was my allergy load reduced. It appears I should not be getting gluten in my diet and mold in my air. So in the wrong environment -- I seem to be an air head.
The other issue is that these IQ tests are from a Caucasian mindset. Sure, cold weather led to "planning ahead" but I don't seem to have the auditory memory, rhythm and linguistic acumen of other people. So there is a lot of "intelligence" that is not measured. If it was just bench press and not jumping that made an athlete, Caucasians would win -- so we've rigged the tests for the ability to spit back what we've read (memorization) and a few mathematical abilities that are good to have.
I just don't see how this IQ correlation matches anything in the real world of success, because I've seen more comprehensive studies that prove your parents income has much more influence on your success in life than your grades in school. That's about networking and influence -- not intelligence.
And GDP correlating to IQ? GDP is a measure of economic activity. If a hurricane ruins houses, GDP goes up. The difference between the Dutch and Mexico is more about Socialism vs. Kleptocracy -- is that something to do with genetics? I doubt it. The US has a strong GDP because we've got a strong military and any market not open to exploitation gets "a visit." I was just born in this country, and my greater intelligence in finding connections and invention isn't tested by IQ tests and is not used by my job.
We can say that relative to a given test -- there are differences genetically. But I think we also need to say; "not all intelligence is measured." A lot of us high IQ guys are socially inept -- and social intelligence is as important or more important than book learnin'.
I think that; yes, there are PC issues that stop the science on this question, but the MOST IMPORTANT THING, is that humans have not really understood human intelligence. We don't get that Elephants are more social than we are because we cannot speak their language -- it may be richer than ours. We don't know, because we aren't smart enough yet to know what we don't know.
So IQ won't be settled until we can figure out all aspects of what it means to make something intelligent, and by that time, we will all be in the short bus compared to an artificial intelligence that helped us solve it.
I'm afraid we may see a rehash of the DMCA being used to protect profit margins on the Printer Toner cartridges. Already it's about $200 to get a spare key because they have a chip in it. There's a whole host of problems that occur where you just go in and they reinstall software or replace some CPU chip worth $5 -- but they are the sole source. So as the car gets more reliable, they build in "must get dealer to fix" and it's just a quick software patch -- it just costs a few hundred and the money goes directly to manufacturer.
YES they need security, but you know their first instinct will be "pay us big bucks to solve simple problem because SECURITY." Then we'll see more software patents keep improvements locked up because "car + computer". Any obvious thing will be patented and we are back to $100 in equipment, $1,000 in FRAND patents.
I think we can develop a theory for "why chaotic systems develop equilibrium" and I think it would start with concentrations of energy sources. If there is a lot of sediment with nutrients and energy being buried on the sea floor -- it's LIKELY that some organism will exploit it eventually.
It's interesting to look at (if I remember correctly) the Pleistocene epoch, where for about 50 million years there was no bacteria that broke up and digested falling trees. So we have a lot of coal from this epoch for this very reason.
EVENTUALLY, bacteria that converted wood pulp evolved and we are not a planet layered in fallen trees.
But there's also no guarantee -- hence the runaway "Oxygen pollution" that almost lead to the earth freezing over. The worms churning the see floor were LIKELY but not necessarily inevitable.
There also seems to be a need for a dynamic environment without too many drastic swings for life to keep evolving.
Slashdot Mirror
Having said all that, the MAIN problem with this man is stupidity.
If the point is deterrence and something FOR SOCIETY, than I can't see why any more than 6 months is reasonable. Prison is horrible and nobody in their right mind wants to be there -- despite the blather of people who don't expect to go who are "tough on crime".
I want crazy people who are going to kill me and rich people who abuse power in prison -- that's it. If we closed half of them this country would be headed in the right direction.
If the guy were SMART, he wouldn't be going to jail. And Jail seems to just be a place for POOR or STUPID. Everybody else just contributes a lot of money to the legal system.
Seems really sad. It's not like these people make a HUGE difference to profits. Only companies can charge for "potential damages" and have to show real damages.
However, if you went blind because of Core Exit in the Gulf, you better keep your doctor's receipts.
Woz was very brilliant but he wasn't very practical.
Steve Jobs was a genius in his own right, but not necessarily the hacker/engineer of Woz -- but he worked very closely with design engineers.
His name is on hundreds of patents and that's not because he sat back and just signed them.
Woz alone would never have created anything like Apple, and Steve Jobs without Woz could not have either -- in life, we can't be good at everything, and it's a perfect storm if you can find people who can help you where you are weak.
But don't compare Jobs to Balmer -- that's unfair and ridiculous.
He just followed Bill Gates example;
Step #1, Join a group of geeks creating Basic
Step #2, Copyright their openly shared work and then sue them.
Step #3, Hire a hacker to steal CP/M and reelable the drive letters, then repeat the "steal IP and then sue them" procedure
Step #4, Repeat the taking of other's ideas and then buy their stock when it collapses then stop suing yourself.
Step #5, Act like a good lawyer repeatedly and have everyone call you a geek.
Step #6, Retire in luxury and donate some money to some causes instead of pointing out that a thousand other millionaires might have allowed other people to feel achievement rather than put someone on a pedestal who was just a savvy predatory capitalist.
I'm sure that there is some marketing research that has found "Would you like fries with your post vomit repast?" actually has sales value.
So this is it then, we've accepted that when the grizzled wild eyed man comes from the bowls of some mega corp and screams; "Soylent Green is PEOPLE!" That he will then add, with no change in tempo; "...And as a result, we'd like to offer our customers a 30% discount on burgers."
We're all on board with this because if we don't upsell everyone's dog, at all times, we don't get any burgers, even if they are made of grandma.
OK, so it's kind of like Crossover Games -- it creates a wrapper with everything that an app (game) needs from an OS, but doesn't require the entire OS.
You are basically then allocating memory and feeding tasks to the wrapper without expending resources you don't need. To describe what it can and cannot do, all you can say is; "it depends."
Is that about right?
That's if you accept what the Corporate PR said about the Exxon Valdez -- and you ignore the 1000x incidents like this that get no press.
The on solar incident that is killing birds also doesn't have the "unknown unknowns' there aren't that many unintended consequences down the line.
The Valdez spill continues to have SOME ecological impact. It also wasn't cause by a drunken sea captain - that was the cover story that they adopted and likely the captain got compensated for. The COMPANY POLICY was that they turned off all the radar and sonar systems that they PROMISED the Inuit that they would have on to protect the wild life. The Inuit went for protection of wildlife, over levying a large toll on this profit making venture.
Exxon saved money paying for the trial and underpaying and stalling the payouts -- some people just died of old age waiting to collect. Having to pay for all the safety procedures was more expensive than a guaranteed cataclysm.
I just wanted to point that out while all the pro oil and pro nuclear people gloat about extrapolating bird deaths that someone admitted to vs. bird deaths that PR agencies are never going to admit to. We pay trillions to a military to procure oil profits and we will be paying for 2000 years to safeguard mothballed nuclear plants and so I'm going to debate people on "cost of Kilowatt" when all the stats are lies and damn lies that we compare our apples and oranges to.
We do not really know the cost of most of these dirty fuels, but we do hear a lot of happy talk about it and comparisons to "worst case scenarios" for alternative energy. Birds killed by concentrated light -- I'm so surprised! Put up some fake owls on poles -- impact reduced.
My guess is the metal fatigue is being cause by radiation. Mars does not have the atmosphere and magnetosphere of Earth (no news flash here). So maybe it's just a case where cosmic radiation causes metal fatigue and we didn't know that -- or perhaps it's SPECIFIC to the type of allow being used.
"knee jerking white knight mangina useful idiots swooping in"
Nobody would call you a hater -- to your face, within range of your shotgun which is reasonably attached to the gun rack on the side of your laptop. Nobody.
Since I'm on the internet, I'll just say; "it's a private website, and they can have any stupid policy they want." Just saying. Just calmly saying with no anti or pro intent. I'm putting down my pen -- it's just a pen.
I'm backing away from my keyboard now. Slowly.
> However I would really hope the actual dangerous stuff isn't on the same network that allows any sort of internet access.
You spelled Nuclear correctly, but if you want the DOH (Department Of Hope), it's down the hall between the DOWT (Department Of Wishful Thinking) and OMGTWB (Oh My God-That Went Boom!)
No, there is a "nearly free" lunch if you are a multinational corporation or an executive attached to one.
The REAL average tax rate of fortune 500 companies is 13%. That's what Mitt Romney pays -- well, the income we KNOW about.
The last stat I looked at showed that the government paid around 52% of all medical expenses. And administrative costs at hospitals were around 42%.
What should we learn from this? In the US our cost is about twice to four times as much for healthcare as other civilized countries. More than half of this money is just going into the pockets of insurance companies, drug companies (charging more here than they do abroad and drugs that cost pennies to cows cost dollars to humans). HMOs and Hospitals. There are middle men in the equation.
The blame is getting spread around, but it's all about who gets the money. And it isn't the doctors or the patients -- the people actually involved.
We already have paid more than enough for Universal Health care, but there are corporations and wealthy that have removed their money from the system and there are fat cats making the money and getting us to look to blame the wrong parites. Why would they want to SOLVE this situation -- the FREE LUNCH is working out great for a lot of people with a lot of money.
It doesn't "chill the speech" of the young or ignorant -- but it sure scares me out of posting REAL THOUGHTS attached to Facebook.
Anything can and will be used against you in the court of public opinion so anonymous = freedom in the information age.
I couldn't agree more. In an insane world, the sane blogger must appear as a troll!
Huffingtonpost.com forced a policy change that required a Facebook login. I don't want my opinions to tag me, like my credit rating. Eventually, if I've got any opinions that don't follow the "common and popular" I can create a self-reinforcing negative reputation.
Having what you really think follow you isn't good for being employed. And being unemployed isn't good for a credit rating. And a bad credit rating means insurance costs more. It's a really effective way to make dissidents "non persons" over time.
Anonymity on the internet is the last refuge of Democracy. If we cannot protest and voice our complaints anonymously -- then the only people who will get good reputations and jobs will be those that agree with the status quo.
I think the greatest speed limitation now is our "computing dimensions" -- we are still using binary logic in the computer. For instance, if we moved to optical computing -- sure the structures would get larger, and there are density issues, but if you can create a binary logic gate for each color, your "dimension" of computing is limited only by the frequencies you can discern. You add massive parallelism.
Now if we can move from binary logic at the same time, more computing work can get done per cpu cycle. In this case, the main limitation is coming up with a new computer logic to accommodate more than an off/on state.
And for data storage, holographic also is less "dense" than current hard drives, but you can add angles, and so more data can be stored in the same location.
I remember seeing a news story about a train conductor who "took marijuana and caused a deadly crash." They also mentioned, almost as a footnote near the end of the story that there were nearly 24 empty Miller Lite beer cans.
So I think we can't rule out something else that could have caused the malady.
But if this is 1/700,000 -- you are below the danger level of side effects to Aspirin.
Peanuts are legal and they can potentially kill more people.
Now we might put a warning label so people can look for the side effects, but this doesn't seem like a threat above "slipping on rubber ducky". Other than paranoia, this is about the third time I've heard of a person almost destroyed by MJ. There are many legal things that are far more dangerous.
If you have a trillion cameras all operating in sequence such that they are triggered exactly so one activates a trillionth of a second after the other, than you've got exactly the same information via speed of light as just one camera. The only question is how much light each device is sampling. The shorter the time window, the more sensitive the measurement of light.
But I don't see any problem with speed of light; you are just sampling what hits the sensor at a faster rate.
I'm just wondering who would sit around for a few weeks to watch a humming bird beat its wings a few times. We need some hyperbolic metaphors so we can comprehend how fast this is...
But I have to admit that if my intentions were ever good, I wasn't actually marketing anymore. I'm glad that he's apologetic, but he was in marketing. You don't swing a pitchfork in Hell and pretend you don't work there.
The "racial differences" for athletic ability are also incredibly over rated. You take anyone and start them on a program of wind sprints from the age of 4 and they are going to do better than the average couch potato. So if we try and factor out "given the same situation" then there is a minor difference -- we have only factored for the "rate of improvement given certain inputs." We don't know what "peak ability is" because most of us don't ever approach our peak.
If I'd stayed a book worm recluse like I was when I was ten, and I saw the only value in this world as "being smart", I'd be very, very educated as far as books are concerned.
It's not that we can't find a CLEAR difference with tests, but there are so many cultural differences that make the difference on athletic performance and intelligence it makes the other points moot. A few studies with adoption notwithstanding.
The genetics between humans other than a few aboriginal groups, is so minor as to be inconsequential. It's not like we are talking about Poodles and Retrievers. It's exactly like "all humans are poodles" and we are arguing superiority based on hair style.
One day our kids will be learning twice as much as they do today. New techniques and possibly modifications will be employed. Any on of the kids from 200 years in the future would put people today in the dust. So maybe we need to find better educational techniques based on culture, and let kids gravitate towards what works best.
The main problem I have with these IQ debates is; we don't cover all forms of intelligence, and we use the results as excuses to not do our best. I think that's why some people are so "PC" about the issue -- because every group "on top" in human history has tried to make arguments for why the people on top are naturally superior.
For instance; The royalty probably had higher IQ's than the average peasantry in medieval Europe and likely because of diet.
Some poles used to do IQ tests before people could vote, and the questions were entirely designed to be easy for a caucasian.
There is a difference, but I don't think people should be surpassed that others get upset, or that people call make valid points of larger differences in opportunity, and more recent "environmental history." What we think is "genetic IQ" may more likely be adaptive genes which can change one generation to the next. For instance, if your parents were weight lifters -- you might be better at lifting weights as certain genes are turned on. I expect we will see a lot more real science backing up the notion that humans and other animals that have to adapt to wildly changing conditions, can have massive changes in genetics based on recent family history.
For about 20 years I figured (before the anthropologists made it gospel), that we didn't kill off Neanderthals but interbred with them. Much of the superior Neanderthal strength however was bred out. Why? I figure the reason the weaker branch outbreak the genes for strength during an ice age was due to "metabolism." Super strong muscles even if the creature is smart requires more food.
Humans are about the weakest mammal pound for pound, but we also seem to have nearly the lowest metabolism. Only the Armadillo has lower average body temperature and it's barely a proper mammal.
Humans learned to cook to improve digestion and concentrate energy in food, and we also turned into omnivorous wimps to survive on what an animal a third our size requires -- and meanwhile manage to carry around a large brain. Something had to go. If this is accepted theory or not today, I haven't checked.
I think he was trying to make complex points. Yes he could have provided clip notes.
However I notice that you didn't add enough jokes to your comment. More jokes would make me WANT to read an english critique.
I also disagreed with about 50% of what he said, but I think we need to argue what he said and not how he said it.
TL;DR More funny stuff make me read. ;-)
As a person who is actually Caucasian and was found to have genius IQ -- I'm going to dispute the way racial intelligence is computed. For one thing, I experienced a lot of ADD and ADHD as a child -- and later it seemed I "grew out of it" but the real reason was my allergy load reduced. It appears I should not be getting gluten in my diet and mold in my air. So in the wrong environment -- I seem to be an air head.
The other issue is that these IQ tests are from a Caucasian mindset. Sure, cold weather led to "planning ahead" but I don't seem to have the auditory memory, rhythm and linguistic acumen of other people. So there is a lot of "intelligence" that is not measured. If it was just bench press and not jumping that made an athlete, Caucasians would win -- so we've rigged the tests for the ability to spit back what we've read (memorization) and a few mathematical abilities that are good to have.
I just don't see how this IQ correlation matches anything in the real world of success, because I've seen more comprehensive studies that prove your parents income has much more influence on your success in life than your grades in school. That's about networking and influence -- not intelligence.
And GDP correlating to IQ? GDP is a measure of economic activity. If a hurricane ruins houses, GDP goes up. The difference between the Dutch and Mexico is more about Socialism vs. Kleptocracy -- is that something to do with genetics? I doubt it. The US has a strong GDP because we've got a strong military and any market not open to exploitation gets "a visit." I was just born in this country, and my greater intelligence in finding connections and invention isn't tested by IQ tests and is not used by my job.
We can say that relative to a given test -- there are differences genetically. But I think we also need to say; "not all intelligence is measured." A lot of us high IQ guys are socially inept -- and social intelligence is as important or more important than book learnin'.
I think that; yes, there are PC issues that stop the science on this question, but the MOST IMPORTANT THING, is that humans have not really understood human intelligence. We don't get that Elephants are more social than we are because we cannot speak their language -- it may be richer than ours. We don't know, because we aren't smart enough yet to know what we don't know.
So IQ won't be settled until we can figure out all aspects of what it means to make something intelligent, and by that time, we will all be in the short bus compared to an artificial intelligence that helped us solve it.
I'm afraid we may see a rehash of the DMCA being used to protect profit margins on the Printer Toner cartridges. Already it's about $200 to get a spare key because they have a chip in it. There's a whole host of problems that occur where you just go in and they reinstall software or replace some CPU chip worth $5 -- but they are the sole source. So as the car gets more reliable, they build in "must get dealer to fix" and it's just a quick software patch -- it just costs a few hundred and the money goes directly to manufacturer.
YES they need security, but you know their first instinct will be "pay us big bucks to solve simple problem because SECURITY." Then we'll see more software patents keep improvements locked up because "car + computer". Any obvious thing will be patented and we are back to $100 in equipment, $1,000 in FRAND patents.
I think we can develop a theory for "why chaotic systems develop equilibrium" and I think it would start with concentrations of energy sources. If there is a lot of sediment with nutrients and energy being buried on the sea floor -- it's LIKELY that some organism will exploit it eventually.
It's interesting to look at (if I remember correctly) the Pleistocene epoch, where for about 50 million years there was no bacteria that broke up and digested falling trees. So we have a lot of coal from this epoch for this very reason.
EVENTUALLY, bacteria that converted wood pulp evolved and we are not a planet layered in fallen trees.
But there's also no guarantee -- hence the runaway "Oxygen pollution" that almost lead to the earth freezing over. The worms churning the see floor were LIKELY but not necessarily inevitable.
There also seems to be a need for a dynamic environment without too many drastic swings for life to keep evolving.