when I was cramming to learn the pointless shit that had nothing to do with my job while in college, so I'm not quite sure what that kind of caffeine and beer-induced learning haze is supposed to teach you about the real world.
bingo
the whole idea that having some random, abstractly "difficult" class that is difficult b/c it is full of pointless busy work, and that class will test who will be a good engineer...the whole notion is foolish and ruining tech
the idea of "weeding out" is fine...but making a class antagonistic expressly for that purpose just **wastes students time**...you 'weed out' by the admissions process
i really believe this 'weeding out' error has made a mark on the tech industry...it has significantly contributed to the hostile, alienating environment of tech work
right on...glad we could close the debate w/ some kind of mutual acknowledgement...usually when i get into a back/forth debate w/ someone on a deepthread it ends badly...
so that post, which was written long ago but I still hold to i figure, was did indeed mention Hayek (what did you think of my graphic?)
I mentioned Hayek because I felt that it would be a good way to find common ground between self-professed "libertarians" and the more liberal types I know.
I believe people are **too tied to quoting economics philosophers** when discussing economics in a context of a policy. I felt that I could write a post that would bridge an unnecessary and divisive ideological gap between two groups who, by policy, are virtually in lockstep..."libertarians" and progressive democrats
not all democrats, progressive democrats...and the other liberal groups...I like "libertarians" and indeed had my own "libertarian" phase
so that's why I mentioned the Austrian school...as an Occupy protester trying to break false ideological distinctions by "reclaiming" an influential philosopher
again thanks for reading and any feedback is appreciated...maybe post on my page or contact me another way?
i never claimed that I followed the Austrian School or the writings of Ludwig Von Mises...at all
does this mean you're trolling is successful? that I keep responding to you? good lord...
just in case you're being real underneath all this trolling...if you want to keep conversing, let's do it in another format...we are waaaaaaay off-topic and i feel bad/. has to process this text...
also...i'm still right...you have a lot to learn...maybe you are too dependent on philosophers to do your thinking for you?
humans are not "just machines" because we can **choose to program ourselves and formulate/test hypothesis that we communicate/share/compare with others**
humans **can be** programmed...yes...
ways you can "program" a human:
> control information they receive > physical/emotional abuse > chemicals (alchohol, 'roofies', etc) > the Frey Effect > cattle prod
note: all of the above are **abuse** and illegal without informed consent
so you're wrong...humans cannont "be programmed"....the can surely "be abused" however
understand this forever and change your way of thinking or you are **just a slave**
China had better hope we pay them huh? And they better hope our money is worth something too...which makes ***China dependent on our stability*** China isn't a threat...they're a non-voting shareholder crossing their fingers that their investment makes money
I have proven your reductionist, trolling ideas about macroeconomics wrong every way that this comment thread would demand.
I could do without trolls like you on slashdot forever.
Just stop commenting. Slashdot will not suffer at all from the absence of your trolling.
You really are totally wrong and you'll either realize it and change or you wont. Either way stop commenting here.
Kotaku & Gawker's other sites are definitely hit or miss in the comments, but some of them are great...you get a diversity of voices you don't see on/. ever
it's about the 'noise' filter for me...i can scroll down through a Kotaku comment thread and it's pretty easy to scan for the relevant threads
a good rule is that good comments usually follow good comments or contradict well written but bad comments....quality discussion is not *only* to be found in controversy...sometimes 4 people all agreeing is very insightful
i try to browse/. at -1 just to see what AC's newbies are saying...i was an AC noob once...
when i used to do music reviews I'd interview artists and they'd talk about similarity of sound mostly as a function of the type of instrument or accoutrement they used...
the whole "man vs machine" conversation has gotten hopelessly muddled by "AI" hype from Kurzweil types & pop science news...
is if we replace artists with computers.
impossible...computers are complex machines that follow instructions
what you mean is, "if we continue programming computers to generate art"
the "artist" is whatever monkey programs the machine to make the art....UNDERSTAND THIS FOREVER AND INTEGRATE IT INTO YOU PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
the researchers in TFA are doing some interesting work, but they are fully choosing the parameters to compare...which means the accuracy of the research is *dependent on the researcher's ability to pick salient visual factors*, the researchers would have to learn alot about how artists work AND have a good understanding of visual design
each artist works differently, and no researcher can ever confirm if the artist has ever seen the art they are supposed to have been influenced by
there are so many holes in this research you could drive 6 trucks into it simultaneously at 6 different angles...call it an "MC Escher error"
so now a BTC thread has a majority of anti-BTC comments, esp AC's...I'm wondering what caused this change...or if it's always been viewed with skepticism but hype warped our perception
i'm telling you, ever since we started seeing BTC on/., and especially after it got big, i tried to provide a counterpoint to the BTC proponents...got modded troll every time
i was cool about it, not trollface...especially not at first, maybe after a months I'd get aggro in a deepthread but really i went out of my way to be fair minded
got hammered by the mods!
now the AC's are some of the most hilarious anti-BTC comments (someone above asked for a BTC to Pog to Beanie Baby conversion table)
i don't know what this all means...I know htere are paid commentors and hype/fanbois but i'm just wondering if people have come to their senses about BTC or if it's always been this way and the hype/comment bots warped our perception
look, TFA is good work, so props...DNA is not "communication" however
am I quibbling about language? maybe
my degrees are: double BA Communications Theory & Comparative Anthropology, my MS is in Information and Communication Science and my ABD PHD is in Systems Science
so that might explain why I am taking issue with the use of the world "communication"...sure, in the sense that the universe is made of 'information' then yes, it's 'communication'
in the cybernetic sense, communication as control, then it works too, however this is the quibble: 'communication' has always theoretically had a 'oneness' to the 'sender' node...sender>message>receiver...this plant system is not that
one group can send one message, but two plants with a symbiotic relationship is best described scientifically using Biology nomenclature
still arguing at shadows...you have no more ground to give...this point is the main point of this whole thread:
anyone making decisions about US policy based on the notion that our 'national debt' is in any way related to personal 'debt' has no credibility in discussions like this
and it's about how people perceive problems in academia
we don't have to starve research/university budgets b/c of some budgets b/c of some imagined "budget crisis"
TFA and you are way off kilter
understand this: your notions of how economics works are foolish and disproven...you're a dupe...
China/Russia were never what made the dollar the world's reserve currency (and during the Cold War they were much more aligned globally), and those links...from 'ft.com' and 'zerohedge.com' are not what they purport to be...there is no threat to the dollar as the world's reserve currency
Here's how to falsify my claim: present evidence that the World Bank is dissolving, that China is selling it's T-bonds at a loss, and no countries are buying T-bills, and the major indexes in the world are listing another currency as the world reserve
You presented some random google search results...it's not counterevidence to my claim *at all*
seriously...China and Russian monetary policy have never been part of this discussion and they do not affect the truth of what I said, which you did not contradict:
anyone making decisions about US policy based on the notion that our 'national debt' is in any way related to personal 'debt' has no credibility in discussions like this
i have my problems with Amazon, but I'm glad this is happening
it's a way for owners of newspapers to make their online portion profitable without affecting editorial funciton
see, print has never been "dead"...it's always been a failure of the business model of the owners of the paper...usually based on a complete misunderstanding of **how to make money from the internet**
status quo in tech says, "scape personal data from users to deliver custom ads & charge more for those ads"
Amazon's method here is nothing new or 'innovative' but it's **application** here is innovative in the sense that it can systemically provide a solution to a bad business model
I explained, simply, why "debt is not debt" when comparing the USA & individual debt
the lone national superpower and world's reserve currency maker is different than a suburbanite w/ two mortgages
you make vague claims but no real evidence or logic...just the same Fox News noise...
anyone making decisions about US policy based on the notion that our 'national debt' is in any way related to personal 'debt' has no credibility in discussions like this
No, we're in deeper debt than any society in history.
this whole ontology has been debunked: WE ARE NOT IN DEBT
we haven't sold our souls to China...the fact that they buy T-bonds means they are **dependent** on us staying strong...not the reverse...they are nothing more than minority shareholders...random investors in the US
the 'national debt' is a real thing, so is budget deficits, but it's not equivalent in any way to the debt of an individual
the US dollar is the world currency, *we print the money & run the world economy*
international finance 'debt' is wholly different than the 'debt' of some random suburbanite household
TFA assumes all 'trolls' are doing so just for the "lulz"
that's certainly not the case...these articles written by tech illiterates are ruining our industry (or at least making it difficult by not covering the problem properly)
Public Relations and other media companies pay grey-hat contractors to "boost their social media presence" meaning post fake comments by fake accounts or just by having paid monkeys doing it
Disquss & the facebook.com plugin for sites both have this problem
even here on/., look at a thread about Uber, there will be many high UID comments from random-named Google+ accounts linked to/.'s system
if you're examining online "trolls" and you don't factor in sock puppets, you're missing half the problem
Slashdot Mirror
bingo
the whole idea that having some random, abstractly "difficult" class that is difficult b/c it is full of pointless busy work, and that class will test who will be a good engineer...the whole notion is foolish and ruining tech
the idea of "weeding out" is fine...but making a class antagonistic expressly for that purpose just **wastes students time** ...you 'weed out' by the admissions process
i really believe this 'weeding out' error has made a mark on the tech industry...it has significantly contributed to the hostile, alienating environment of tech work
look, I'm just going to drop in and say that there's a loose scientific consensus on all kinds of pre-Columbian contact with the Western Hemisphere
that said, it would be odd if it was seals not humans
right on...glad we could close the debate w/ some kind of mutual acknowledgement...usually when i get into a back/forth debate w/ someone on a deepthread it ends badly...
i like to think we were somewhat on topic
hey thanks for having a look
so that post, which was written long ago but I still hold to i figure, was did indeed mention Hayek (what did you think of my graphic?)
I mentioned Hayek because I felt that it would be a good way to find common ground between self-professed "libertarians" and the more liberal types I know.
I believe people are **too tied to quoting economics philosophers** when discussing economics in a context of a policy. I felt that I could write a post that would bridge an unnecessary and divisive ideological gap between two groups who, by policy, are virtually in lockstep..."libertarians" and progressive democrats
not all democrats, progressive democrats...and the other liberal groups...I like "libertarians" and indeed had my own "libertarian" phase
so that's why I mentioned the Austrian school...as an Occupy protester trying to break false ideological distinctions by "reclaiming" an influential philosopher
again thanks for reading and any feedback is appreciated...maybe post on my page or contact me another way?
yeah...I see now...
so I run VooDooCode...it looks like this:
1 eye of newt
1 heart of chicken (fresh)
4 feet of black cat born under full moon
1 gallon pig blood
the position of the elements of the code determines the future of the person who I am reading
like your idea, VooDooCode explains human behavior simply, and proves that humans are "just machines"
i never claimed that I followed the Austrian School or the writings of Ludwig Von Mises...at all
does this mean you're trolling is successful? that I keep responding to you? good lord...
just in case you're being real underneath all this trolling...if you want to keep conversing, let's do it in another format...we are waaaaaaay off-topic and i feel bad /. has to process this text...
also...i'm still right...you have a lot to learn...maybe you are too dependent on philosophers to do your thinking for you?
humans are not "just machines" because we can **choose to program ourselves and formulate/test hypothesis that we communicate/share/compare with others**
humans **can be** programmed...yes...
ways you can "program" a human:
> control information they receive
> physical/emotional abuse
> chemicals (alchohol, 'roofies', etc)
> the Frey Effect
> cattle prod
note: all of the above are **abuse** and illegal without informed consent
so you're wrong...humans cannont "be programmed"....the can surely "be abused" however
understand this forever and change your way of thinking or you are **just a slave**
just to be clear for you, so you can learn, here is your problem:
you're taking the economics of a **suburban family** and applying them to a post-specie, fiat currency anachic economic system with one hegemon (USA)
sovereign debt is not equivalent to personal finance debt...learn it
China had better hope we pay them huh? And they better hope our money is worth something too...which makes ***China dependent on our stability*** China isn't a threat...they're a non-voting shareholder crossing their fingers that their investment makes money
I have proven your reductionist, trolling ideas about macroeconomics wrong every way that this comment thread would demand.
I could do without trolls like you on slashdot forever.
Just stop commenting. Slashdot will not suffer at all from the absence of your trolling.
You really are totally wrong and you'll either realize it and change or you wont. Either way stop commenting here.
Kotaku & Gawker's other sites are definitely hit or miss in the comments, but some of them are great...you get a diversity of voices you don't see on /. ever
it's about the 'noise' filter for me...i can scroll down through a Kotaku comment thread and it's pretty easy to scan for the relevant threads
a good rule is that good comments usually follow good comments or contradict well written but bad comments....quality discussion is not *only* to be found in controversy...sometimes 4 people all agreeing is very insightful
i try to browse /. at -1 just to see what AC's newbies are saying...i was an AC noob once...
Exaclty...
when i used to do music reviews I'd interview artists and they'd talk about similarity of sound mostly as a function of the type of instrument or accoutrement they used...
the whole "man vs machine" conversation has gotten hopelessly muddled by "AI" hype from Kurzweil types & pop science news...
impossible...computers are complex machines that follow instructions
what you mean is, "if we continue programming computers to generate art"
the "artist" is whatever monkey programs the machine to make the art....UNDERSTAND THIS FOREVER AND INTEGRATE IT INTO YOU PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
the researchers in TFA are doing some interesting work, but they are fully choosing the parameters to compare...which means the accuracy of the research is *dependent on the researcher's ability to pick salient visual factors*, the researchers would have to learn alot about how artists work AND have a good understanding of visual design
each artist works differently, and no researcher can ever confirm if the artist has ever seen the art they are supposed to have been influenced by
there are so many holes in this research you could drive 6 trucks into it simultaneously at 6 different angles...call it an "MC Escher error"
not true...not in macroeconomics
did you learn nothing from the financial crisis?
debt can be a commodity...the US is not "in debt" to China b/c they bought our T-bills
you're taking the economics of a **suburban family** and applying them to a post-specie, fiat currency anachic economic system with one hegemon (USA)
academia needs funding...***funding to educate idiots like you past 10th grade social-studies level understandings of economics***
you're trolling (ignoring the TFA aspect of the convo), being facile, reductionist, and wholly factually inaccurate
so now a BTC thread has a majority of anti-BTC comments, esp AC's...I'm wondering what caused this change...or if it's always been viewed with skepticism but hype warped our perception
i'm telling you, ever since we started seeing BTC on /., and especially after it got big, i tried to provide a counterpoint to the BTC proponents...got modded troll every time
i was cool about it, not trollface...especially not at first, maybe after a months I'd get aggro in a deepthread but really i went out of my way to be fair minded
got hammered by the mods!
now the AC's are some of the most hilarious anti-BTC comments (someone above asked for a BTC to Pog to Beanie Baby conversion table)
i don't know what this all means...I know htere are paid commentors and hype/fanbois but i'm just wondering if people have come to their senses about BTC or if it's always been this way and the hype/comment bots warped our perception
look, TFA is good work, so props...DNA is not "communication" however
am I quibbling about language? maybe
my degrees are: double BA Communications Theory & Comparative Anthropology, my MS is in Information and Communication Science and my ABD PHD is in Systems Science
so that might explain why I am taking issue with the use of the world "communication"...sure, in the sense that the universe is made of 'information' then yes, it's 'communication'
in the cybernetic sense, communication as control, then it works too, however this is the quibble: 'communication' has always theoretically had a 'oneness' to the 'sender' node...sender>message>receiver...this plant system is not that
one group can send one message, but two plants with a symbiotic relationship is best described scientifically using Biology nomenclature
still arguing at shadows...you have no more ground to give...this point is the main point of this whole thread:
anyone making decisions about US policy based on the notion that our 'national debt' is in any way related to personal 'debt' has no credibility in discussions like this
and it's about how people perceive problems in academia
we don't have to starve research/university budgets b/c of some budgets b/c of some imagined "budget crisis"
TFA and you are way off kilter
understand this: your notions of how economics works are foolish and disproven...you're a dupe...
China/Russia were never what made the dollar the world's reserve currency (and during the Cold War they were much more aligned globally), and those links...from 'ft.com' and 'zerohedge.com' are not what they purport to be...there is no threat to the dollar as the world's reserve currency
Here's how to falsify my claim: present evidence that the World Bank is dissolving, that China is selling it's T-bonds at a loss, and no countries are buying T-bills, and the major indexes in the world are listing another currency as the world reserve
You presented some random google search results...it's not counterevidence to my claim *at all*
seriously...China and Russian monetary policy have never been part of this discussion and they do not affect the truth of what I said, which you did not contradict:
i have my problems with Amazon, but I'm glad this is happening
it's a way for owners of newspapers to make their online portion profitable without affecting editorial funciton
see, print has never been "dead"...it's always been a failure of the business model of the owners of the paper...usually based on a complete misunderstanding of **how to make money from the internet**
status quo in tech says, "scape personal data from users to deliver custom ads & charge more for those ads"
Amazon's method here is nothing new or 'innovative' but it's **application** here is innovative in the sense that it can systemically provide a solution to a bad business model
I explained, simply, why "debt is not debt" when comparing the USA & individual debt
the lone national superpower and world's reserve currency maker is different than a suburbanite w/ two mortgages
you make vague claims but no real evidence or logic...just the same Fox News noise...
anyone making decisions about US policy based on the notion that our 'national debt' is in any way related to personal 'debt' has no credibility in discussions like this
this whole ontology has been debunked: WE ARE NOT IN DEBT
we haven't sold our souls to China...the fact that they buy T-bonds means they are **dependent** on us staying strong...not the reverse...they are nothing more than minority shareholders...random investors in the US
the 'national debt' is a real thing, so is budget deficits, but it's not equivalent in any way to the debt of an individual
the US dollar is the world currency, *we print the money & run the world economy*
international finance 'debt' is wholly different than the 'debt' of some random suburbanite household
the idea of having a teacher be somewhere *not* in the physical presence of the student has been around forever
they *always* say it will "revolutionize education"
it never does
at best, it helps extend and improve the experience for people who ****already couldn't attend class****
that's great, but it's absolutely not any kind of revolutionary step in tech
search the Popular Science archives...this stuff has been around since the radio was invented and it's all bunk
sure, working remote using tech is a benefit, but it's never a **substitution for real interaction**
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement:
the problems in academia are all eminently fixable...we have the money...we're the richest country in the history of the earth
there is a concerted effort to reduce availability of analytical-minded teaching
**of course**
that's the narrative for most tech companies that we see in the media being depicted as "successful"
that's the model and everyone knows it...this guy was a fool if he didn't see it (but i accept his apology!)
seriously, /. the above quotation explains quite a bit of conflict in tech today...it's about **incentives**
with the above business model, the incentives all go in the wrong direction: towards 'big brothering' a person as an internet profit model
we must end this notion forever!
TFA assumes all 'trolls' are doing so just for the "lulz"
that's certainly not the case...these articles written by tech illiterates are ruining our industry (or at least making it difficult by not covering the problem properly)
Public Relations and other media companies pay grey-hat contractors to "boost their social media presence" meaning post fake comments by fake accounts or just by having paid monkeys doing it
Disquss & the facebook.com plugin for sites both have this problem
even here on /., look at a thread about Uber, there will be many high UID comments from random-named Google+ accounts linked to /.'s system
if you're examining online "trolls" and you don't factor in sock puppets, you're missing half the problem
nice...sort of like 'P-hacking'
it would be great to be able to find the pattern then retroactively examine research data to see which (many probably) show evidence of graph hacking