I read it very recently, but can't seem to remember where. Part of the problem is that the terms I think of using are unfortunately used for many other subjects so Google has proved fruitless.
There are lots of things parents do to kids to make the kids easier to raise, that become extremely problematic in adults.
Many people want/prefer a less assertive/aggressive child. They do what they are told, instead of trying to invent/create new things to do on their own.
That makes for a less assertive/aggressive adult. They do what they are told, instead of inventing/creating.
Another clear example is the 'polite rage'. Studies have shown that the more polite a society, the more seething rage develops inside it. Where a traditional brash American northerner gets angry, but never fights for honor, a traditionally polite American southerner stays polite until you go to far and then goes for blood.
I am (and probably most people) totally OK with the cops creating fake internet accounts to catch criminals. Nothing wrong with that. What is more troubling is the attempts of some cops to take impersonate actual living people on internet accounts and use THAT to catch criminals.
That should be illegal - at least without the express written consent of the people being impersonated.
Yes, the cops have done this and the person sued. I would love to hear what happened in that law suit, because impersonating someone else is a very different matter from creating a fake account.
You do realize that every single cell in your body can be considered to be millions of years old, right?
Each cell divided from your original ovum/sperm combination. Those came from their parents, which came from their parents, etc. etc.
Cells have been proven to be able to divide into new ones FOREVER, given minimal changes. Telomeres and the other forms of aging are all just anti-cancer techniques.
You do however have a good point when you mention the brain.
But that is also not insurmountable. It's called gradual replacement. Kill about 1% of the brain every year and grow new cells.
Yes there will be some partial memory loss. So what? By that age, you already have memory issues. Personality and the 'soul' (if it exists) will remain the same. You ameliorate the memory issues by leaving personal recordings of important things - video, etc. Basically, you look at your own Facebook page [ ughh, I found a real use for Facebook:( ]
You are correct we will never win against entropy.
But you are wrong when you think the constraints are freer for artificial intelligence. They simply are not there. The 'weaknesses' of organic life are actually strengths that people do not understand. Things like blinking - it is an automatic health maintenance procedure, not a weakness in human vision.
While it is true they have zero evidence, this is slashdot, not a scientific paper. As such, if we ignore anyone with zero evidence, then Myspace will have more content than we do.
I totally agree with this. I think the reason our SETI program is like Native Americans looking for Europeans by trying to find Smoke signals. ET must likely does not use radio waves, they are too primitive.
The basic argument is that they can be: 1) Effectively Immortal
2) Upgradeable.
3) Information transfer.
My counterargument is simple: a) Genetic engineering and b) information transfer is a weakness
The main obstacle to medicine preventing aging is cancer. Aging started out as a simple way to prevent unlimited cell reproduction, i.e. cancer. Give us another 200-500 years and we will stop aging and cancer. We won't really be immortal, as humans will still die from accidents - but so will artificial life forms.
What few upgrades that are good ideas (for GENERALISTS, not specialists - don't give people tools that not all of us of need), we will be able to slowly work into the genome using the same genetic engineering.
Finally, high speed, unfiltered information transfer is NOT a good idea for life forms. It lets you be hacked. Any creature that has a simple way to upload a ton of data is susceptible to having a virus inserted into that data, which means they get stuck in low level jobs, not high level ones.
That's bullshit. Among other things, people would sue the theaters, not Sony. They could have released it to HBO, etc. Not releaseing it all is a huge mistake. Not just in lost revenue, not just in lost money spent creating and advertising for the movie, but a huge hit for their reputation. The money alone is probably far worse that any unreasonable jury award for situations like that. That is, if you were right (which I think is laughable), that a terrorist attack would end having Sony being sued and they had to pay out money, the amount paid out would be far less than what they are throwing away today.
Every single patriotic American is saying "what a bunch of pussies." Everyone is talking about how Sony caved to the terrorists. How N. Korea made Sony their b!tch.
Performers, directors, vendors, etc. are all thinking "Why should I work with Sony again when I can go work for someone that will actually PUT OUT the movie that will bring my carreer to the next level. If I waste my time with Sony - evenn if they pay me (not certain), it could be career suicide.
The damage for an attack based on the movie would be MINISCULE compared to the damage they have done to themselves.
Step 1) Someone asks what they should get on their smart watch that they are considering buying.
Step 2) I list several features they should get.
Step 3) You point out that all the features I list 'already do that'.
But you seem to think that a list of features that alread exist is not appropriate response for someone looking for features on their smart watcH? Why?
I meant that violent people enjoy violent video games.
That is, you don't become violent because you play a lot of violent video games. Instead you play a lot of violent video games because you have an aggressive personality.
Smart watches should not simply be small smartphones on your wrist. They should take advantage of their place on your wrist. To my mind that means any reasonable smart watch should do the following:
Sports applications - specifically it should measure the movement of your arm at the very least, if not the full exercise monitoring/recording of the fitbit and the similar items.
Medical application - specifically at least measure your pulse, if not full blood sugar, etc.
In addition it should have a good voice recognition and bluetooth capacity to make up for the small screen size.
Free speech is a constitutional right and has no business being restricted in any way. Similarly, flying aircraft - manned or unmanned is constitutionally totally unmentioned.
Which means that it is totally reasonable to restrict drones, but not at all reasonable to restrict speech.
It doesn't matter when the laws were passed, it matters when the laws are interpreted. Any politician or judge can tell you that.
As for knowing what a car was, I new that 40 years ago - which not only means you were wrong about your probably, it also shows that you made a knee jerk assumption much larger than mine.
I work in IT. I can practically guarantee you that multiple high level employees of Sony have put evidence in their emails of major sexual peccadilloes. Not to mention discussion of people trying to cover up similar (and worse) crimes committed by Sony stars. It would not surprise me if evidence of affairs, homosexuality, child pornography, rape, and even covering up deaths (accidental or otherwise) was on their servers.
If North Korea got this information and threatened to reveal it, that would definitely explain why Sony caved quicker than the Iraqian army when first attacked by Isis.
They have not been for over a decade.
Nor are they libertarian, despite Ron Paul.
The Republican Party has become a simple Rural Party. They protect rural interests, because they found a way to gerrymander rural districts into a majority of congressional districts, despite the majority of the population living in urban areas.
Car dealers are more rural than car manufacturers - as rural areas need more dealers per person than urban dealers, while car manufacturers in a single urban environment can supply the entire country.
As such, the GOP will support the car dealers at the expense of the car manufacturers.
Most people take the drones to parks to play with them anyway. So letting people use them inside official parks, like Central Park, and Prospect Park would be a simple, fair compromise.
First, the number of 'in between stages' that are mostly useless is incredibly small.
Before you fly, you can glide. Before you can glide, you can slow your fall. Before you can slow your fall, you can use it to warm/cool your body. Spread the partial wing in the shade when hot and you increase surface area, cooling yourself down. Do the same in the sun and you get more warmth
Basically, if the effect is really mostly useless than that also means it is not particularly bad - such as being born an albino. Albinos live fine lives, with just a few problems. Having a minor problem does not stop you from living OR breeding.
Your understanding of macro evolution is seriously flawed. Macro evolution is just a long series of micro evolution. That's ALL it is. There is nothing special or different about it.
The problem is you are not smart enough (no one is - except perhaps god) to understand all the intervening steps.
You don't 'give up' teeth, you get a mutation and are stuck with it. They are not making conscious decisions to evolve, that is just plain ignorance. If you can find a way to survive without the teeth, you continue on. Eventually you get another mutation, and maybe it evolves to take the place of something you lost.
Birds found a way to survive without teeth before they gained a beak. Possibly it was those rocks some birds swallow and use to grind up large chunks of food (I don't know when or if all do this).
Maybe teeth became a liability. People used to die from a rotten tooth, maybe there was an epidemic of bird tooth infecting microbes. It doesn't matter.
As for gender based on-single cell organism, you have that wrong also. Sex evolved from eating - the victim's genes survived inside the single cell that tried to eat it, and it's grew from there. At that point all those single celled life forms were hermaphrodite - they could eat or be eaten and their DNA would survive in the eater. Eventually, the hermaphroditic single celled life forms developed into two varieties - one that could eat and absorb the DNA (female) and the other that could be eaten and pass on their DNA (male).
Also there was no clear line between single celled life forms and multicelluar life forms. First came colonies that learned to cooperate but could also survive on their own.
The system I am considering works fine over the internet. Specifically, the commercially available phone linked technology lets you take a picture of your screen with your cellphone, using software installed on the cellphone. Then it sends a text message that unlocks your account, just as if you had entered a password.
I always despise these reports. They come up with something that life identical to our own - on our world could not stand up against and then say "No life is possible anywhere else".
No.
If we didn't have a Van Allen belt, some bright scientist would say no life could survive on earth, because of the radiation.
Life as we know it evolved to deal with earth. It evolved to live with at atmosphere, with a van allen belt protecting it, with limited meteors strikes (because Jupiter protected us), with our sun, with tides, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Just because we can't deal with a series of Gamma Ray burst does not mean living creatures living under an ice ocean, feeding on volcanic energy can't survive it.
Basically, what's going on here is some one asked a Physicist a question about biology. You get an answer that makes about as much sense as if you ask Stephen Hawking if the tumor in your kidney is benign or malignant.
Slashdot Mirror
I read it very recently, but can't seem to remember where. Part of the problem is that the terms I think of using are unfortunately used for many other subjects so Google has proved fruitless.
I will however state that in my opinion your sense of humor needs a lot of work. It is clear you were trying to be funny but failed.
Many people want/prefer a less assertive/aggressive child. They do what they are told, instead of trying to invent/create new things to do on their own.
That makes for a less assertive/aggressive adult. They do what they are told, instead of inventing/creating.
Another clear example is the 'polite rage'. Studies have shown that the more polite a society, the more seething rage develops inside it. Where a traditional brash American northerner gets angry, but never fights for honor, a traditionally polite American southerner stays polite until you go to far and then goes for blood.
That should be illegal - at least without the express written consent of the people being impersonated.
Yes, the cops have done this and the person sued. I would love to hear what happened in that law suit, because impersonating someone else is a very different matter from creating a fake account.
Each cell divided from your original ovum/sperm combination. Those came from their parents, which came from their parents, etc. etc.
Cells have been proven to be able to divide into new ones FOREVER, given minimal changes. Telomeres and the other forms of aging are all just anti-cancer techniques.
You do however have a good point when you mention the brain.
But that is also not insurmountable. It's called gradual replacement. Kill about 1% of the brain every year and grow new cells.
Yes there will be some partial memory loss. So what? By that age, you already have memory issues. Personality and the 'soul' (if it exists) will remain the same. You ameliorate the memory issues by leaving personal recordings of important things - video, etc. Basically, you look at your own Facebook page [ ughh, I found a real use for Facebook :( ]
You are correct we will never win against entropy.
But you are wrong when you think the constraints are freer for artificial intelligence. They simply are not there. The 'weaknesses' of organic life are actually strengths that people do not understand. Things like blinking - it is an automatic health maintenance procedure, not a weakness in human vision.
While it is true they have zero evidence, this is slashdot, not a scientific paper. As such, if we ignore anyone with zero evidence, then Myspace will have more content than we do.
I totally agree with this. I think the reason our SETI program is like Native Americans looking for Europeans by trying to find Smoke signals. ET must likely does not use radio waves, they are too primitive.
My counterargument is simple: a) Genetic engineering and b) information transfer is a weakness
The main obstacle to medicine preventing aging is cancer. Aging started out as a simple way to prevent unlimited cell reproduction, i.e. cancer. Give us another 200-500 years and we will stop aging and cancer. We won't really be immortal, as humans will still die from accidents - but so will artificial life forms.
What few upgrades that are good ideas (for GENERALISTS, not specialists - don't give people tools that not all of us of need), we will be able to slowly work into the genome using the same genetic engineering.
Finally, high speed, unfiltered information transfer is NOT a good idea for life forms. It lets you be hacked. Any creature that has a simple way to upload a ton of data is susceptible to having a virus inserted into that data, which means they get stuck in low level jobs, not high level ones.
Every single patriotic American is saying "what a bunch of pussies." Everyone is talking about how Sony caved to the terrorists. How N. Korea made Sony their b!tch.
Performers, directors, vendors, etc. are all thinking "Why should I work with Sony again when I can go work for someone that will actually PUT OUT the movie that will bring my carreer to the next level. If I waste my time with Sony - evenn if they pay me (not certain), it could be career suicide.
The damage for an attack based on the movie would be MINISCULE compared to the damage they have done to themselves.
Step 1) Someone asks what they should get on their smart watch that they are considering buying.
Step 2) I list several features they should get.
Step 3) You point out that all the features I list 'already do that'.
But you seem to think that a list of features that alread exist is not appropriate response for someone looking for features on their smart watcH? Why?
That is, you don't become violent because you play a lot of violent video games. Instead you play a lot of violent video games because you have an aggressive personality.
Sports applications - specifically it should measure the movement of your arm at the very least, if not the full exercise monitoring/recording of the fitbit and the similar items.
Medical application - specifically at least measure your pulse, if not full blood sugar, etc.
In addition it should have a good voice recognition and bluetooth capacity to make up for the small screen size.
2) A whole bunch of people totally ignoring this study because they don't like what it means.
Which means that it is totally reasonable to restrict drones, but not at all reasonable to restrict speech.
What's next - you gonna bring up hitler?
As for knowing what a car was, I new that 40 years ago - which not only means you were wrong about your probably, it also shows that you made a knee jerk assumption much larger than mine.
If North Korea got this information and threatened to reveal it, that would definitely explain why Sony caved quicker than the Iraqian army when first attacked by Isis.
The Republican Party has become a simple Rural Party. They protect rural interests, because they found a way to gerrymander rural districts into a majority of congressional districts, despite the majority of the population living in urban areas.
Car dealers are more rural than car manufacturers - as rural areas need more dealers per person than urban dealers, while car manufacturers in a single urban environment can supply the entire country.
As such, the GOP will support the car dealers at the expense of the car manufacturers.
Most people take the drones to parks to play with them anyway. So letting people use them inside official parks, like Central Park, and Prospect Park would be a simple, fair compromise.
When applying for actual jobs pick the entry level ones and push your passion.
That way you can get into actual space industry.
Before you fly, you can glide. Before you can glide, you can slow your fall. Before you can slow your fall, you can use it to warm/cool your body. Spread the partial wing in the shade when hot and you increase surface area, cooling yourself down. Do the same in the sun and you get more warmth
Basically, if the effect is really mostly useless than that also means it is not particularly bad - such as being born an albino. Albinos live fine lives, with just a few problems. Having a minor problem does not stop you from living OR breeding.
The problem is you are not smart enough (no one is - except perhaps god) to understand all the intervening steps.
You don't 'give up' teeth, you get a mutation and are stuck with it. They are not making conscious decisions to evolve, that is just plain ignorance. If you can find a way to survive without the teeth, you continue on. Eventually you get another mutation, and maybe it evolves to take the place of something you lost.
Birds found a way to survive without teeth before they gained a beak. Possibly it was those rocks some birds swallow and use to grind up large chunks of food (I don't know when or if all do this).
Maybe teeth became a liability. People used to die from a rotten tooth, maybe there was an epidemic of bird tooth infecting microbes. It doesn't matter.
As for gender based on-single cell organism, you have that wrong also. Sex evolved from eating - the victim's genes survived inside the single cell that tried to eat it, and it's grew from there. At that point all those single celled life forms were hermaphrodite - they could eat or be eaten and their DNA would survive in the eater. Eventually, the hermaphroditic single celled life forms developed into two varieties - one that could eat and absorb the DNA (female) and the other that could be eaten and pass on their DNA (male).
Also there was no clear line between single celled life forms and multicelluar life forms. First came colonies that learned to cooperate but could also survive on their own.
The system I am considering works fine over the internet. Specifically, the commercially available phone linked technology lets you take a picture of your screen with your cellphone, using software installed on the cellphone. Then it sends a text message that unlocks your account, just as if you had entered a password.
No.
If we didn't have a Van Allen belt, some bright scientist would say no life could survive on earth, because of the radiation.
Life as we know it evolved to deal with earth. It evolved to live with at atmosphere, with a van allen belt protecting it, with limited meteors strikes (because Jupiter protected us), with our sun, with tides, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Just because we can't deal with a series of Gamma Ray burst does not mean living creatures living under an ice ocean, feeding on volcanic energy can't survive it.
Basically, what's going on here is some one asked a Physicist a question about biology. You get an answer that makes about as much sense as if you ask Stephen Hawking if the tumor in your kidney is benign or malignant.
The value of gold is only high for people. Cows don't care about gold.
All valuation assumes that there are people in that same location. If they are not there, then the value is always $0.
Worth is dependent upon location. Gold buried under 600 tons of radioactive lava is worthless.
Water in a desert is priceless.
Water and high purity plutonium located in outer space are worth far more than gold in that same location.