Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to.
You made an interesting point, perhaps without even realizing it. Autistic individuals have an extremely difficult time making eye contact, or even looking at the person who is talking to them or vice versa, and from my experience they move around a lot too. This would be a big problem for the camera to stay focused on the other person.
I worked at an ISP for a while, we were attempting to implement some sort of spam filtering; yet our biggest problem was giving the users a choice. Why are there spammers? Why is spamming such a lucrative thing to do? Because somewhere there is some moron who wants the spam. That was our problem, we couldn't filter out all the spam because some of our customers wanted the spam. It took a bit for me to wrap my head around that one.
Although, from my understanding, I don't think the principle is restricted to position and momentum. The definition states: "One cannot assign with full precision values for certain pairs of observable variables, including the position and momentum, of a single particle at the same time." Position and momentum (or velocity) are the most common used examples because it is easy to understand why you cannot know this. To accurately measure velocity you need to measure over time and distance to get a precise measurement. Therefore you cannot know a particle's velocity (and therefore momentum) and position at the same exact time (with precision of course). However, like I stated in the beginning, the principle does not restrict you to these two measurements.
Being an unfortunate resident of Maryland I do know that they tried to set up speed cameras; however, from my understanding that idea failed. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company in charge of developing the cameras and when the controversy started, they let another company take over that. LM didn't want the heat apparently. They had a couple for "testing" purposes on the beltway around DC, it caught me once, but they were only sending out warnings since it wasn't "legal" yet to ticket speeders.
Agreed. However, are parents doing their job? It seems that more and more parents aren't taking this responsibility of teaching their children. I have two sisters and one sister-in-law that are teachers and it seems that more and more they are having to teach kids things that they should have learned at home (potty training being a big one). Parents seem to be shoving their responsibilities over to whomever the government will pay to do it, and shirking their duties. I'm not necessarily saying this is due to laziness, it's almost become necessary for two incomes to support a household -- especially one that contains children. What are parents to do, but let the government become the parents.
The statement was more or less supposed to be somewhat humorous. My point was that although I don't think the law is necessarily a bad thing, I don't agree with the fact that it bans all minors. There is a huge difference between an 8 year old and a 17 year old, and I don't think lumping them all into one category is a valid solution.
The law doesn't say that it will ban the sales of games with just violence in them, but heinous and sexual violence. If parents don't have the sense enough to not let their kids play games with that in them, then I wonder if the government should step in. We are talking about minors here.
On the other hand, maybe there should be two different levels of minors. Minor minors would be under 12, regular minors would be 12-17. Regular minors could buy these games, minor minors could not.
My mom never quite grasped this concept. I was a computer engineer major with about a 3.2 GPA. My sister was a elementary education major with a 3.8-4.0 GPA. My mom used to get mad at me and couldn't quite understand why my GPA wasn't as high as my sister's. Ugh, that used to frustrate me to no end.
I'm assuming you're being facetious; reminds me of something similar. When I was 15 I took red cross lifeguarding classes. It was an easy summer job and the pay was fairly decent. One of the requirements for passing the course was you had to tread water for 1 minute holding a 10 pound brick out of the water. There are many reasons that one would need to use this skill. However, there were many students that failed this part of the test and therefore did not pass the course. After a couple of years of more and more students failing this aspect, red cross decided to take it out of the test. Soon after it seemed that everyone in the area was a lifeguard. I think actually there were more certified lifeguards than jobs for them.
I guess the point is that if engineering were easier we would have a lot more engineers in the job pool. A majority of those would not be "as educated" as others. This ultimately could affect our jobs, and/or our pay. Perhaps not, but still, I'm not a big fan of making things "easier" so more people will participate. I mean, that's one of the perks of being an engineer, you feel elite, knowing that a lot of people couldn't hack it.
I did not say I was a 'conspirator,' just that I don't see much of a point in fighting what (from Biblical prophecy) is bound to happen.
Perhaps my wording made it seem that I was too apathetic about this 'chip.' However, my viewpoint is that God said it's going to happen. I believe that it will happen in His timing. Therefore anything I may do to 'fight' it in coming would be fruitless anyway.
Another reason I don't really see the point to fight the 'chip' is that it needs to happen. Our society is being pushed closer and closer to needing something of this sort (identity theft is rising, etc.). My take on Revelation is not that the 'chip' in itself is bad, but that to take the chip one must worship the beast, which is bad. From a technological standpoint, having an embedded chip seems to be a good idea.
If 'evangelical Christians' are correct (at least those of us who are pre-tribulation), then we won't be here when the 'mark of the beast' happens. So, yeah, I don't fight it (the chip).
You beat me to it. I honestly was confused for a moment when I first read that.
Re:I liked Internet Explorer 7 the first time...
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 2
I had never heard of the acid test, a quick search brought me to the page (then I realized there was a link to it from TFA). I attempted to load the page with Firefox 1.0.6 (on Windows and Linux) and IE 6 (6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gddr.050301-1519 to be exact) and none of the browsers passed the test. Firefox rendered it better than IE, but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. So, I'm wondering as you are, what browsers pass this test? Does Opera?
For some odd reason (since we are on Slashdot, and your sig gives a hint), your very humorous statement seems to have failed. I'm quite perplexed by this.
Slashdot Mirror
you touch her arm and she doesn't flinch or move away
Thanks, that's probably the funniest thing I've read on Slashdot today!
Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to.
You made an interesting point, perhaps without even realizing it. Autistic individuals have an extremely difficult time making eye contact, or even looking at the person who is talking to them or vice versa, and from my experience they move around a lot too. This would be a big problem for the camera to stay focused on the other person.
I worked at an ISP for a while, we were attempting to implement some sort of spam filtering; yet our biggest problem was giving the users a choice. Why are there spammers? Why is spamming such a lucrative thing to do? Because somewhere there is some moron who wants the spam. That was our problem, we couldn't filter out all the spam because some of our customers wanted the spam. It took a bit for me to wrap my head around that one.
What are you talking about? Everyone knows that it takes five hits to take out the air-craft carrier, whereas a battleship will sink in four!
Although, from my understanding, I don't think the principle is restricted to position and momentum. The definition states: "One cannot assign with full precision values for certain pairs of observable variables, including the position and momentum, of a single particle at the same time." Position and momentum (or velocity) are the most common used examples because it is easy to understand why you cannot know this. To accurately measure velocity you need to measure over time and distance to get a precise measurement. Therefore you cannot know a particle's velocity (and therefore momentum) and position at the same exact time (with precision of course). However, like I stated in the beginning, the principle does not restrict you to these two measurements.
Being an unfortunate resident of Maryland I do know that they tried to set up speed cameras; however, from my understanding that idea failed. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company in charge of developing the cameras and when the controversy started, they let another company take over that. LM didn't want the heat apparently. They had a couple for "testing" purposes on the beltway around DC, it caught me once, but they were only sending out warnings since it wasn't "legal" yet to ticket speeders.
Better get patent on that right away!
I was thinking this was the "or else" that the EU issued the US.
Agreed. However, are parents doing their job? It seems that more and more parents aren't taking this responsibility of teaching their children. I have two sisters and one sister-in-law that are teachers and it seems that more and more they are having to teach kids things that they should have learned at home (potty training being a big one). Parents seem to be shoving their responsibilities over to whomever the government will pay to do it, and shirking their duties. I'm not necessarily saying this is due to laziness, it's almost become necessary for two incomes to support a household -- especially one that contains children. What are parents to do, but let the government become the parents.
The statement was more or less supposed to be somewhat humorous. My point was that although I don't think the law is necessarily a bad thing, I don't agree with the fact that it bans all minors. There is a huge difference between an 8 year old and a 17 year old, and I don't think lumping them all into one category is a valid solution.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't this issue one where the state is making the ethical decision? Not the federal government?
The law doesn't say that it will ban the sales of games with just violence in them, but heinous and sexual violence. If parents don't have the sense enough to not let their kids play games with that in them, then I wonder if the government should step in. We are talking about minors here.
On the other hand, maybe there should be two different levels of minors. Minor minors would be under 12, regular minors would be 12-17. Regular minors could buy these games, minor minors could not.
My mom never quite grasped this concept. I was a computer engineer major with about a 3.2 GPA. My sister was a elementary education major with a 3.8-4.0 GPA. My mom used to get mad at me and couldn't quite understand why my GPA wasn't as high as my sister's. Ugh, that used to frustrate me to no end.
I'm assuming you're being facetious; reminds me of something similar. When I was 15 I took red cross lifeguarding classes. It was an easy summer job and the pay was fairly decent. One of the requirements for passing the course was you had to tread water for 1 minute holding a 10 pound brick out of the water. There are many reasons that one would need to use this skill. However, there were many students that failed this part of the test and therefore did not pass the course. After a couple of years of more and more students failing this aspect, red cross decided to take it out of the test. Soon after it seemed that everyone in the area was a lifeguard. I think actually there were more certified lifeguards than jobs for them.
I guess the point is that if engineering were easier we would have a lot more engineers in the job pool. A majority of those would not be "as educated" as others. This ultimately could affect our jobs, and/or our pay. Perhaps not, but still, I'm not a big fan of making things "easier" so more people will participate. I mean, that's one of the perks of being an engineer, you feel elite, knowing that a lot of people couldn't hack it.
Who says people who don't curse think themselves superior than others? I don't curse, yet I don't consider myself superior to others because of it.
I think that would be $4,608 for the RAM. The box (laptop) only has 1 TB of RAM; but 2 TB of storage space.
Quite possibly, I had never heard of Eliza until I read TFA.
Reminds me of the "psychoanalyst" game that comes with XEmacs. Unfortunately I didn't get it until your reply to being modded as flamebait.
I did not say I was a 'conspirator,' just that I don't see much of a point in fighting what (from Biblical prophecy) is bound to happen.
Perhaps my wording made it seem that I was too apathetic about this 'chip.' However, my viewpoint is that God said it's going to happen. I believe that it will happen in His timing. Therefore anything I may do to 'fight' it in coming would be fruitless anyway.
Another reason I don't really see the point to fight the 'chip' is that it needs to happen. Our society is being pushed closer and closer to needing something of this sort (identity theft is rising, etc.). My take on Revelation is not that the 'chip' in itself is bad, but that to take the chip one must worship the beast, which is bad. From a technological standpoint, having an embedded chip seems to be a good idea.
If 'evangelical Christians' are correct (at least those of us who are pre-tribulation), then we won't be here when the 'mark of the beast' happens. So, yeah, I don't fight it (the chip).
NOOOOOO!!! It's in WMV format.
You beat me to it. I honestly was confused for a moment when I first read that.
I had never heard of the acid test, a quick search brought me to the page (then I realized there was a link to it from TFA). I attempted to load the page with Firefox 1.0.6 (on Windows and Linux) and IE 6 (6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gddr.050301-1519 to be exact) and none of the browsers passed the test. Firefox rendered it better than IE, but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. So, I'm wondering as you are, what browsers pass this test? Does Opera?
Except http://maps.google.com/ was not around at the time. :-)
For some odd reason (since we are on Slashdot, and your sig gives a hint), your very humorous statement seems to have failed. I'm quite perplexed by this.