If we can determine what people are thinking, we can certainly determine whether they're in a fully conscious state while they're doing it. With proper precautions, I don't think that's an issue.
This is called BCI (Brain-Computer Interface) technology, and it's a fairly hot topic in HCI these days. I think people are dreaming too low-level, though: there are some things, like composing music, that are far easier to do mentally than physically. These are the things people should be getting excited about (after we perfect curing the disabled with it), not moving mice across the screen and telepathically IMing people, both of which have reasonably natural interfaces already.
I'm very careful about managing my bookmarks, only adding what I'm actually interested in at a given moment and removing the link once it's gone. Since "the literature" required for my research primarily consists of journal and conference publications, the locations of which are fairly immutable, I don't usually worry about the URLs becoming invalid.
If I get any "aha" ideas while reading these papers, I record them in a whiteboard or notebook. Eventually, I have the paper distilled to three or four of these and I no longer need to read the paper to think about the ideas presented therein.
Basically, if you manage your bookmarks well and take good notes, that's all you need:)
I'm a Ph. D. student in Computer Science with an INTJ MBTI type. YMMV, depending on profession ("research" means different things to different people) and personality ('P' types tend to organize themselves differently).
I think it's to maintain the perception of control. Despite the fact that 99% of the work I do can be done remotely and I am more productive when I don't need to travel 3 hours per day to and from my school, my advisor still insists that I show up at the lab routinely "so he can communicate with me if he needs to"... not that he does unless I specifically schedule a time to meet with him.
They won't understand vestibular processing, but they will probably understand "that dizzy feeling they get when they spin around". You can then explain why that happens when it does, then talk about manipulating balance for virtual reality (maybe using video games or movies as an example) and the work that your lab does. You just need to find some way to relate it to them while maintaining its "coolness".
It means we can analyze the interplay between the structure of the breast (on all levels, including the cellular one) and cancer without having to slice someone's breast off or perform complicated imaging modalities (such as galactography, in which a contrast agent is injected into the nipple prior to imaging).
My group was working on a computer simulation for the same reason, but this shows more potential.
Of particular interest would be the processes that take place for DCIS to become invasive. Recent research indicates that computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems in mammograms are having adverse effects on prognosis due to DCIS - it doesn't always become a major health hazard, but it has the potential to become invasive carcinoma. As such, if it is found, it will be removed... and CAD is very good at finding these.
I also had this problem a very long time ago. One day my account simply stopped working. I never received a reason from AOL (actually, it may have still been Mirabilis; that's how long ago it was), so I simply stopped using ICQ.
Last I checked, entering (5+1=) into (only) the Vista calculator was enough to crash it. Not exactly critical, but I wonder whether they've fixed it by now. I did report it.
Re:Tag this article deathofcreationism
on
The Human Mutation
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That's because ID is creationism attempting to invade the realm of science. Do so and you subject yourself to science's rules.
That said, there is no amount of evidence that will convince the really staunch ID proponents. Then again, there are still people who believe in geocentrism.
Don't assume that because someone knows the languages or broad technologies that a company uses, that person will immediately be able to jump into the job. Among other things, proprietary systems and a lack of experience with a company's environment, goals, and clients can easily foil people who still do have the requisite skills in the basic technologies to pass an interview. In these scenarios, quick learners have an advantage.
To go further: we don't need "lefts", "rights", or "centrists" at all; we need people who can form their own independent opinions on issues. It's this sort of dichotomous thinking that has led us into a two party system to begin with.
In fact, do we require a party system at all? IMO, it violates the separation of powers and polarizes the policies of both politicians and the people, not to mention it's terribly divisive.
Given that a defining characteristic of nerdiness is intellectualism, I'm not sure that people with that attitude really belong in the sciences. Of course, it's difficult to differentiate a primary intimidation or dislike of intelligence with the (generally false) stereotypes now associated with the field.
We don't need to change science itself; we need to change our perception of scientists.
I was going to agree, but I just got access to my school's supercomputer today. If you're fortunate enough to go to a school with good computing resources, there are many opportunities to play with some really incredible machines that you'd probably never get access to in any other way.
(Of course, my first thought when logging on and noticing that I currently had the whole system to myself was "is there really anything I'll need this much power for?")
I don't know where you live, but I'm glad I'm not there!
Fortunately, I've hardly ever been around it here (not sure where you got the idea that this had anything to do with my friends), but first found that I was sensitive to the smoke when visiting Amsterdam, a place where pot is already legal. It has nothing to do with "quality", since the pot being smoked in Amsterdam is presumably "high-grade", nor would it be something that was fixed with legalization.
Migraines are more than headaches. Please look them up; it may be enlightening.
Hey.. why don't you quit buying fresh produce? That comes in trucks that produce byproducts that _I_ inhale and it gives ME headaches. You don't see me bitching at your stupid ass for it.
Not an apples-to-apples comparison (pun intended). The right to eat, a necessary condition for life, trumps the pain delivery may cause. Furthermore, even for non-necessary goods, such as electricity, the fumes from vehicles are not the intended byproduct of delivery (the fruit/good is); they are an unfortunate side-effect that we are working very hard to reduce or eliminate. Finally, you're not presenting an argument for pot, you're presenting an argument against fruit.
Cigarettes give me headaches and I used to smoke them for 20 years.
Why?
Hey putz... wake up and smell your own B.S. When was the last time you actually was honest with yourself? When was the last time you looked in the mirror and said "Fuck it... I'm not going to lie to myself anymore.". Never, eh? Keep living the lie. Swallow your valium, take your lunesta, eat your govt. pharms and be happy.
I had expected such a response, though I'm not entirely sure what "lie" you're referring to. I prefer making lifestyle changes to simply medicating my problems away; medications are something to be taken only when necessary and then for the shortest duration possible (and then only after reading and analyzing the effects right down to the level of chemical bonding). I don't even take medications for the aforementioned migraines, preferring to simply avoid triggers.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack me or presume all sorts of ridiculous things about my lifestyle simply because I hold a dissenting viewpoint. The only thing you can truly infer from my argument is that I tend to avoid pot smoke.
The system in question is a republic, and it is working exactly as intended. People elected their reps, their reps passed legislation. Whether the legislation concurs with the wishes of the people is fairly irrelevant. After all, we need to ensure that the majority can never tyrannize by allowing a much smaller group to tyrannize instead.
(Not that I support legalizing marijuana; quite the opposite. I just don't think that republics tend to represent the will of their constituents).
Some of us prefer not to inhale the byproduct of other people's addictions (or suffer the consequences of a new class of DUI drivers). For me, the smoke is a migraine trigger and the only argument for legalization I can see even having the slightest merit is the medical one (and I suspect that even that argument is greatly exaggerated due to bias). I would say it's fine to do only in your own homes, but I have no evidence to believe that the majority of people would be able to manage such self-control.
Your generalization is flawed: geekiness has nothing to do with consumption of any sort of substance. Perhaps a case can be made for novelty-seeking behaviors, but that says nothing about continued use. The generalization you invoke isn't even a stereotype, much less a fact.
I did, but stated my reply poorly. The gist of what I was trying to say is this: I do not require any print materials from the library. Therefore, why travel for something that should already be available where I am, save for an artificial restriction?
Research prowess is relative. The ability to think up ideas is absolute, but the ability to think up ideas that have not yet been discovered is not.
Graduating a workforce is important, but it hardly befits the primary mission of a prestigious university (or system of universities, as IIT is), IMO. Any old university can do job training; some probably far better than more prestigious schools.
If universities do not encourage research, the corporations are going to eventually find a lack of qualified researchers, just as they are currently finding a lack of qualified developers due to declining interest in CS.
Relative to other researchers of the time, I would be putting myself at a disadvantage. It'd be like Einstein traveling to other researchers' locations to discover their work, rather than visiting the library.
You're missing the point. The library may not have the papers I require, whereas I can almost guarantee that they are available online. Why waste research time running all over campus to access resources that I should have available here?
I don't know about other students, but if I had to trek to the campus library every time I needed to cite a reference, I never would have become interested in doing research in the first place and certainly would not be able to slog through the mess that is the first year of a Ph. D. Encouraging bright students to consider research is an important function of a university, integral to future scientific progress (because where else would it happen?), and therefore that IIT is doing this indicates to me that the institution is more concerned with graduating a workforce than seriously encouraging research (or any type of critical thought requiring easy access to reference material, for that matter).
Slashdot Mirror
If we can determine what people are thinking, we can certainly determine whether they're in a fully conscious state while they're doing it. With proper precautions, I don't think that's an issue.
This is called BCI (Brain-Computer Interface) technology, and it's a fairly hot topic in HCI these days. I think people are dreaming too low-level, though: there are some things, like composing music, that are far easier to do mentally than physically. These are the things people should be getting excited about (after we perfect curing the disabled with it), not moving mice across the screen and telepathically IMing people, both of which have reasonably natural interfaces already.
I'm very careful about managing my bookmarks, only adding what I'm actually interested in at a given moment and removing the link once it's gone. Since "the literature" required for my research primarily consists of journal and conference publications, the locations of which are fairly immutable, I don't usually worry about the URLs becoming invalid.
:)
If I get any "aha" ideas while reading these papers, I record them in a whiteboard or notebook. Eventually, I have the paper distilled to three or four of these and I no longer need to read the paper to think about the ideas presented therein.
Basically, if you manage your bookmarks well and take good notes, that's all you need
I'm a Ph. D. student in Computer Science with an INTJ MBTI type. YMMV, depending on profession ("research" means different things to different people) and personality ('P' types tend to organize themselves differently).
I think it's to maintain the perception of control. Despite the fact that 99% of the work I do can be done remotely and I am more productive when I don't need to travel 3 hours per day to and from my school, my advisor still insists that I show up at the lab routinely "so he can communicate with me if he needs to"... not that he does unless I specifically schedule a time to meet with him.
They won't understand vestibular processing, but they will probably understand "that dizzy feeling they get when they spin around". You can then explain why that happens when it does, then talk about manipulating balance for virtual reality (maybe using video games or movies as an example) and the work that your lab does. You just need to find some way to relate it to them while maintaining its "coolness".
It means we can analyze the interplay between the structure of the breast (on all levels, including the cellular one) and cancer without having to slice someone's breast off or perform complicated imaging modalities (such as galactography, in which a contrast agent is injected into the nipple prior to imaging).
My group was working on a computer simulation for the same reason, but this shows more potential.
Of particular interest would be the processes that take place for DCIS to become invasive. Recent research indicates that computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems in mammograms are having adverse effects on prognosis due to DCIS - it doesn't always become a major health hazard, but it has the potential to become invasive carcinoma. As such, if it is found, it will be removed... and CAD is very good at finding these.
I also had this problem a very long time ago. One day my account simply stopped working. I never received a reason from AOL (actually, it may have still been Mirabilis; that's how long ago it was), so I simply stopped using ICQ.
Last I checked, entering (5+1=) into (only) the Vista calculator was enough to crash it. Not exactly critical, but I wonder whether they've fixed it by now. I did report it.
That's because ID is creationism attempting to invade the realm of science. Do so and you subject yourself to science's rules.
That said, there is no amount of evidence that will convince the really staunch ID proponents. Then again, there are still people who believe in geocentrism.
Don't assume that because someone knows the languages or broad technologies that a company uses, that person will immediately be able to jump into the job. Among other things, proprietary systems and a lack of experience with a company's environment, goals, and clients can easily foil people who still do have the requisite skills in the basic technologies to pass an interview. In these scenarios, quick learners have an advantage.
To go further: we don't need "lefts", "rights", or "centrists" at all; we need people who can form their own independent opinions on issues. It's this sort of dichotomous thinking that has led us into a two party system to begin with.
In fact, do we require a party system at all? IMO, it violates the separation of powers and polarizes the policies of both politicians and the people, not to mention it's terribly divisive.
Wikipedia has some useful information on the various licenses if you don't want to read through them directly.
Given that a defining characteristic of nerdiness is intellectualism, I'm not sure that people with that attitude really belong in the sciences. Of course, it's difficult to differentiate a primary intimidation or dislike of intelligence with the (generally false) stereotypes now associated with the field.
We don't need to change science itself; we need to change our perception of scientists.
Did you try the .name? That's what it's there for, after all :)
I was going to agree, but I just got access to my school's supercomputer today. If you're fortunate enough to go to a school with good computing resources, there are many opportunities to play with some really incredible machines that you'd probably never get access to in any other way.
(Of course, my first thought when logging on and noticing that I currently had the whole system to myself was "is there really anything I'll need this much power for?")
The people who don't use Google are the same people who don't care why, so long as it works.
I don't know where you live, but I'm glad I'm not there!
Fortunately, I've hardly ever been around it here (not sure where you got the idea that this had anything to do with my friends), but first found that I was sensitive to the smoke when visiting Amsterdam, a place where pot is already legal. It has nothing to do with "quality", since the pot being smoked in Amsterdam is presumably "high-grade", nor would it be something that was fixed with legalization.
Migraines are more than headaches. Please look them up; it may be enlightening.
Not an apples-to-apples comparison (pun intended). The right to eat, a necessary condition for life, trumps the pain delivery may cause. Furthermore, even for non-necessary goods, such as electricity, the fumes from vehicles are not the intended byproduct of delivery (the fruit/good is); they are an unfortunate side-effect that we are working very hard to reduce or eliminate. Finally, you're not presenting an argument for pot, you're presenting an argument against fruit.
Why?
I had expected such a response, though I'm not entirely sure what "lie" you're referring to. I prefer making lifestyle changes to simply medicating my problems away; medications are something to be taken only when necessary and then for the shortest duration possible (and then only after reading and analyzing the effects right down to the level of chemical bonding). I don't even take medications for the aforementioned migraines, preferring to simply avoid triggers.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack me or presume all sorts of ridiculous things about my lifestyle simply because I hold a dissenting viewpoint. The only thing you can truly infer from my argument is that I tend to avoid pot smoke.
The system in question is a republic, and it is working exactly as intended. People elected their reps, their reps passed legislation. Whether the legislation concurs with the wishes of the people is fairly irrelevant. After all, we need to ensure that the majority can never tyrannize by allowing a much smaller group to tyrannize instead.
(Not that I support legalizing marijuana; quite the opposite. I just don't think that republics tend to represent the will of their constituents).
Some of us prefer not to inhale the byproduct of other people's addictions (or suffer the consequences of a new class of DUI drivers). For me, the smoke is a migraine trigger and the only argument for legalization I can see even having the slightest merit is the medical one (and I suspect that even that argument is greatly exaggerated due to bias). I would say it's fine to do only in your own homes, but I have no evidence to believe that the majority of people would be able to manage such self-control.
Your generalization is flawed: geekiness has nothing to do with consumption of any sort of substance. Perhaps a case can be made for novelty-seeking behaviors, but that says nothing about continued use. The generalization you invoke isn't even a stereotype, much less a fact.
I did, but stated my reply poorly. The gist of what I was trying to say is this: I do not require any print materials from the library. Therefore, why travel for something that should already be available where I am, save for an artificial restriction?
Research prowess is relative. The ability to think up ideas is absolute, but the ability to think up ideas that have not yet been discovered is not.
Graduating a workforce is important, but it hardly befits the primary mission of a prestigious university (or system of universities, as IIT is), IMO. Any old university can do job training; some probably far better than more prestigious schools.
If universities do not encourage research, the corporations are going to eventually find a lack of qualified researchers, just as they are currently finding a lack of qualified developers due to declining interest in CS.
(Here generally referring to my research lab, but extending to wherever I happen to be, whether in my home or in another country)
Relative to other researchers of the time, I would be putting myself at a disadvantage. It'd be like Einstein traveling to other researchers' locations to discover their work, rather than visiting the library.
You're missing the point. The library may not have the papers I require, whereas I can almost guarantee that they are available online. Why waste research time running all over campus to access resources that I should have available here?
I don't know about other students, but if I had to trek to the campus library every time I needed to cite a reference, I never would have become interested in doing research in the first place and certainly would not be able to slog through the mess that is the first year of a Ph. D. Encouraging bright students to consider research is an important function of a university, integral to future scientific progress (because where else would it happen?), and therefore that IIT is doing this indicates to me that the institution is more concerned with graduating a workforce than seriously encouraging research (or any type of critical thought requiring easy access to reference material, for that matter).