As a sailor, I can assure you that once you run out of ice you switch to rum, and it's all good until you make port and can run the freezer off shore power again.
Because we can't ever observe or in any way interact with anything beyond our visual horizon. You can tell stories about what's "outside" all you want, but they're just stories. Until they have some impact, even just in principle, on the universe we can interact on, they're completely irrelevant.
Quantum field theory proposes all-pervading fields that give rise to all observed phenomenon. The Higgs field even has nonzero energy everywhere, and light is a disturbance that propagates through the electromagnetic field. That hits all of the common points for the turn of the century aether theories.
Einstein's relativity itself is a very aether-like theory in that one of the most popular interpretations is a geometric description of curvature in all-pervading space.
You've clearly bought into the "silly aether" folk mythology. There were many theories of aether, some of which were quite compatible with the Michelson-Morley results.
5% was the magnitude of the effect. The statistical significance is determined (roughly) by taking the magnitude of the effect and dividing it by the standard error, then applying the appropriate scaling factor.
I guess that's why he suggested Google ask Apple how they handle it. The article is specifically talking about Google branded phones (which are only available from Google, not through carriers, no?), not Samsungs running Android or something. If you get an iPhone from AT&T, Vodaphone or Ethiopia Tel, Apple takes responsibility for updates to that phone. They absolutely can "go on to the Verizon/T-mobile/AT&T/Sprint network and update your phone. It's called the Internet. It's a good system that works well.
The research backs up your impression, although nobody really seems to like to talk about it. In simulated hiring situations men are sexist, awarding men somewhat higher salaries or judging them better for the job. Women are more sexist, favouring men over women by a greater margin.
Sounds like bad loans to me. It most definitely was people buying houses they couldn't afford, although you can make the argument the the average person is too dumb to know if they can afford a house or not so the size of the loan they can take out should be limited.
The banks that issued those loans played some games, but other banks and insurance companies bought it. They should have known better. If I tell you I've got a AAA bridge to sell, do you buy it without doing a little checking? Either way, everyone involved should have lost their money so that they'd be a little less trusting in the future. If you're investing money you should know what it's invested in, what the risks are, and who's managing it if it's not you.
That wasn't high frequency trading, it was bad loans. Bad loans to people who wanted to buy houses. So the greedy children who just had to have that house they couldn't afford caused an economic crash. The clowns just let them do it.
The unfortunate thing about the whole scenario is that the clowns got bailed out so everyone who invested their money with them didn't get burned. If some idiot loses your money it's supposed to hurt so that you don't give that same idiot more money to play with.
That's how stock markets work - the price is set by a bunch of greedy bastards. If you're also a greedy bastard (or you're the original one) you might lose money trying to get in on these things. If you're not, you don't really care. Unless you make a point of selling on the spike and taking advantage of the greedy bastards.
Of course someone throwing enough money around can change the value of a stock. That's the point of a stock market. This story just says bad things about Bloomberg. You should think twice about buying into anything they manage.
Why should the majority suffer because of a tiny minority who want to do stuff nobody else does?
There will always be hardware for that minority. It might not be as pretty and polished as the consumer stuff, and you might even have to *gasp* build it yourself, but you'll still be able to get it if you want it.
My point is that there's not much differentiating us from primates besides scale, remember. I mentioned the cortex particularly in relationship to neurogenesis, not in relationship to primates. It is the most striking difference between primate brains and those of other animals. I also didn't say there wasn't any neurogenesis in the cortex. There might be, but it's proving pretty hard to find. If you read your reference 3, you'll see this:
The number of migrating cells in the Gould et al. study5, calculated from case numbers 8 and 9, and after a single BrdU injection, is more than 10,000 per day33. Even if only 25% of BrdU-labelled cells were neurons, as has been estimated more recently34, the resulting migratory stream would still be large enough to be readily detected in the frontal lobeswith any light microscopic method, but it has never been observed.Moreover, if most new cells degenerate between 2 and 9 weeks after their birth34, then many pyknotic neurons commensurate with the massive cell death would be expected.This prediction has never been confirmed.
That's the very paper I was referring to when I said "Indirect hints of neurogenesis in the cortex have been reported, but other methods that should turn them up haven't, so the evidence is contradictory." It might be there, and it might not. If it is, it's difficult to detect, much more so than the known neurogensis in older parts of the brain that is known to exist in a wide variety of species. It's also difficult to understand what role ongoing neurogenesis would have in providing some kind of "spark" for intelligence.
I doubt very much there's a magic bullet for intelligence hiding in the human brain. Your friend said it herself: "there is strong evidence that the human brain is a scaled up primate brain." The principles are the same, but there's more of everything.
I guess I was thinking about "device" in terms of electronics rather than pet rocks. The biggest manufacturer of the magnetic/copper bracelets actually got in trouble for making them out of potentially hazardous industrial waste.
It's not the buttons themselves, it's using them to execute more than one command at once. If you seem to manage to press some key combination with perfect timing all the time.
Selling people homeopathy wasn't enough, now there are medical devices. That Thync thing looks like pure snake oil. Unless you walk around with it strapped to just the right spot on your head.
I'm pointing out that there is certainly quite a bit of mass hysteria going around. Sometimes that manifests as whackos killing innocent people, as per your definition. Other times it manifests as whackos engaging in multi-year legislative and regulatory exercises.
The OP was talking about cockpit door regulations. I tend to think that's a good idea, but it obviously has a downside; his point isn't unreasonable. Lots of other "legislative and regulatory exercises" are harder to defend: the random stuff airport security comes up with seems to be borne completely of overreaction. Also things like special border zones hundreds of miles from a border, domestic spying to make Orwell blush, decades long wars, that kind of thing.
Idiots killing innocent people and overbearing regulators: different sides, same mass hysteria coin.
It's tough for an untrained person to kill another in a confined space without a weapon. It makes noise and takes a while. The rest of the crew would notice.
Slashdot Mirror
As a sailor, I can assure you that once you run out of ice you switch to rum, and it's all good until you make port and can run the freezer off shore power again.
Don't forget that Microsoft Azure Web Services will be a clearinghouse for all your commercially valuable information!
Because we can't ever observe or in any way interact with anything beyond our visual horizon. You can tell stories about what's "outside" all you want, but they're just stories. Until they have some impact, even just in principle, on the universe we can interact on, they're completely irrelevant.
Quantum field theory proposes all-pervading fields that give rise to all observed phenomenon. The Higgs field even has nonzero energy everywhere, and light is a disturbance that propagates through the electromagnetic field. That hits all of the common points for the turn of the century aether theories.
Einstein's relativity itself is a very aether-like theory in that one of the most popular interpretations is a geometric description of curvature in all-pervading space.
You've clearly bought into the "silly aether" folk mythology. There were many theories of aether, some of which were quite compatible with the Michelson-Morley results.
Smoked pot in school?
5% was the magnitude of the effect. The statistical significance is determined (roughly) by taking the magnitude of the effect and dividing it by the standard error, then applying the appropriate scaling factor.
Have you heard of the term "average?"
I guess that's why he suggested Google ask Apple how they handle it. The article is specifically talking about Google branded phones (which are only available from Google, not through carriers, no?), not Samsungs running Android or something. If you get an iPhone from AT&T, Vodaphone or Ethiopia Tel, Apple takes responsibility for updates to that phone. They absolutely can "go on to the Verizon/T-mobile/AT&T/Sprint network and update your phone. It's called the Internet. It's a good system that works well.
Solar is also doomed because eventually it will have to scale up to the point where enclosing the entire sun simply isn't enough.
Wind would buy as a bit of breathing room before we'd have to worry about significantly affecting weather patterns.
The research backs up your impression, although nobody really seems to like to talk about it. In simulated hiring situations men are sexist, awarding men somewhat higher salaries or judging them better for the job. Women are more sexist, favouring men over women by a greater margin.
Sounds like bad loans to me. It most definitely was people buying houses they couldn't afford, although you can make the argument the the average person is too dumb to know if they can afford a house or not so the size of the loan they can take out should be limited.
The banks that issued those loans played some games, but other banks and insurance companies bought it. They should have known better. If I tell you I've got a AAA bridge to sell, do you buy it without doing a little checking? Either way, everyone involved should have lost their money so that they'd be a little less trusting in the future. If you're investing money you should know what it's invested in, what the risks are, and who's managing it if it's not you.
That wasn't high frequency trading, it was bad loans. Bad loans to people who wanted to buy houses. So the greedy children who just had to have that house they couldn't afford caused an economic crash. The clowns just let them do it.
The unfortunate thing about the whole scenario is that the clowns got bailed out so everyone who invested their money with them didn't get burned. If some idiot loses your money it's supposed to hurt so that you don't give that same idiot more money to play with.
Why? The professionals' performance is pretty much the same as random.
Realize that investment carries risk and some kinds carry more risk than others.
That's how stock markets work - the price is set by a bunch of greedy bastards. If you're also a greedy bastard (or you're the original one) you might lose money trying to get in on these things. If you're not, you don't really care. Unless you make a point of selling on the spike and taking advantage of the greedy bastards.
Of course someone throwing enough money around can change the value of a stock. That's the point of a stock market. This story just says bad things about Bloomberg. You should think twice about buying into anything they manage.
The ability to focus an eye is a relatively specialized adaptation. There's also this thing in science about not making groundless assumptions.
Why should the majority suffer because of a tiny minority who want to do stuff nobody else does?
There will always be hardware for that minority. It might not be as pretty and polished as the consumer stuff, and you might even have to *gasp* build it yourself, but you'll still be able to get it if you want it.
Did you read the article? They measured how their porpoises have control over the focus.
Dude, they know. They've known for thousands of years.
My point is that there's not much differentiating us from primates besides scale, remember. I mentioned the cortex particularly in relationship to neurogenesis, not in relationship to primates. It is the most striking difference between primate brains and those of other animals. I also didn't say there wasn't any neurogenesis in the cortex. There might be, but it's proving pretty hard to find. If you read your reference 3, you'll see this:
That's the very paper I was referring to when I said "Indirect hints of neurogenesis in the cortex have been reported, but other methods that should turn them up haven't, so the evidence is contradictory." It might be there, and it might not. If it is, it's difficult to detect, much more so than the known neurogensis in older parts of the brain that is known to exist in a wide variety of species. It's also difficult to understand what role ongoing neurogenesis would have in providing some kind of "spark" for intelligence.
I doubt very much there's a magic bullet for intelligence hiding in the human brain. Your friend said it herself: "there is strong evidence that the human brain is a scaled up primate brain." The principles are the same, but there's more of everything.
I guess I was thinking about "device" in terms of electronics rather than pet rocks. The biggest manufacturer of the magnetic/copper bracelets actually got in trouble for making them out of potentially hazardous industrial waste.
It's not the buttons themselves, it's using them to execute more than one command at once. If you seem to manage to press some key combination with perfect timing all the time.
EVE players get banned for programmable buttons. You really can pick your poison.
Selling people homeopathy wasn't enough, now there are medical devices. That Thync thing looks like pure snake oil. Unless you walk around with it strapped to just the right spot on your head.
I'm pointing out that there is certainly quite a bit of mass hysteria going around. Sometimes that manifests as whackos killing innocent people, as per your definition. Other times it manifests as whackos engaging in multi-year legislative and regulatory exercises.
The OP was talking about cockpit door regulations. I tend to think that's a good idea, but it obviously has a downside; his point isn't unreasonable. Lots of other "legislative and regulatory exercises" are harder to defend: the random stuff airport security comes up with seems to be borne completely of overreaction. Also things like special border zones hundreds of miles from a border, domestic spying to make Orwell blush, decades long wars, that kind of thing.
Idiots killing innocent people and overbearing regulators: different sides, same mass hysteria coin.
I also found this interesting:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/n...
Yup, no witch hunts at all. http://rt.com/usa/231839-musli...
It's tough for an untrained person to kill another in a confined space without a weapon. It makes noise and takes a while. The rest of the crew would notice.