With the lack of that, we have to fall back on what we see happening in other industries and situations.
Oh, that is such short-sighted crud.
Another thing that causes problems in the Human mindset is the lack of deep analysis of situations in order to save time. If you don't have the time to think about it, I don't think you have much useful support to give it.
I'm *NOT* saying you're wrong, and I'm *NOT* saying you're right. Think or do like most of the seeking-only-happiness people do and move on at hyper-ADD speed to something else. This is way too deep.
Maybe he's trying to woo the woman who pointed it out to him and suggested he should write an article.
That's the best way to get in bed with a woman. Show her all of the wonderful things you agree with her on....until that day comes when you both start letting the truth about yourselves out.
This is totally smartass, of course. I'm sure you get the point being made. *ahem* Idea.
Oh, I should mention before I move on... I get the observational assumption that I'm a gay male based on my username. poofmeisterp.
Let me sing you a song to remind you of the past and where my first-reaction username may have come from.... *ahem*
"I love CheesyPoofs, you love CheesyPoofs; if we didn' love CheesyPoofs.. weeee'd beeeeee.. laaaaaaaaaaaaame. Like Night Court fifth season laaaaaaaaame! Yahh."
No, we are definitely assumed to be men if we don't...well, basically, if we don't come out of the closet about being women.
Heh.. Yeah. Last time I checked, most people intuitively consider nurses to be female (less than in the past, but still do). They consider firemen to be men, until you see the woman pullin' that uniform up on-scene. You consider the garbage men to be men, until you see a woman.
On and on ad nauseum. In the end, in how many places do we see someone of the unexpected gender and do a double-take with "What are you doing here?"
Last time I did that was.... Oh, wait. I never did that. I must be a weirdo.;)
Has this moron ever considered that maybe, just maybe, women don't happen to be interested in coding?
Moron aside, you make a keen observation. If I recall, the last time I actually went on boards looking for technical information and code snippets, I saw VERY few women. The ones that did exist had men going ga-ga for them. Like the real workplace.
"I met a woman today. She's an experienced coder and is part of our team now. I can't think straight. I lost track of what I was saying.. Sorry.. Where was I?"
I like the response to your post referring to it as Satanism.
Let's look back at some lack of engineering double-checks, and/or other observations from the past. I see some jet aircraft failing and killing all onboard, I see viruses released in food and people getting very ill and some dying from it, I see "medical misadventures," not to quote George Carlin...
Not checking what you consider to be fact doesn't just save time, it introduces potential missed failure points and possible harm to people and property.
They're not the ONLY data, and not the definitive truth.
Why ignore parts of all data in Human definition, when Human observation and learning have resulted in the sets of data we consider the most factual or positive, today?
In school, I learned how to debate the lessons of teachers. I'd ask them how they came to this conclusion as the finite answer, and where they gathered their information from. Instead of the knowledgeable (IMHO) "we don't have all of the answers yet, but this is the most agreed-upon and chosen point of truth," I would get "GET OUT OF MY CLASSROOM. GO TO THE OFFICE!"
*gasp*
"But, but, but... I was thinking about it and there's a missing aspect o..."
It's quite like a lot of events in the Human life time:
1. If you take a chance at things turning out well, you may succeed or lose, and people will like and dislike you, depending on their tendencies.
2. If you don't take a chance, you may be missing out on a possibly great opportunity, or may have avoided a bad opportunity. Either way, you will feel "this way or that" about the outcome. Depends on what you find out about it later and/or how much you think about it.
Conclusion:
If you listen to your brain when the right hemisphere interacts with the left and gives you that "warning" indicator, there is a reason, based on your knowledge and life experience. If you go after something that you feel may be of a threat to you, then you will always be worried that there is a possible negative outcome on the horizon, regardless of the current conditions. Opposed to that concept, if you "go with your gut instinct" and don't take the opportunity, you will also be concerned that you missed something that may have been the best career choice in life. The best choice (IMHO and based on my near-death) is to live life and ignore the "what ifs." Go with your gut instincts and spend time, but not too much time, solving analytical issues that may provide you with better answers as your life matures.
Something's nagging you right now to be concerned about this being a possible threat. That means (again, IMHO) that this one isn't for you. Keep looking, but don't stop learning. It may change in the future, or may not.
Wow, the whole concept in and of itself is a gamble. You know what I mean:)
Clarification: was referring to the analysis of the operation and using existing information to assist. In my case, I knew that it was going to "suck" to quit smoking because of the numbers. The opposite in my case is the fact that I have the lovely (and horrid) disorder of Asperger's. Logic alone helped me understand what I was feeling and why; I could therefore displace myself from those feelings and convert them to objects in the mental sense, e.g. calling a friend or family member for a five minute conversation that started with "DAMNIT!!!!!"
Converting the "need fer-a-smoke" to an object (in the sense applicable) of a word or action like walking outside to my smoke spot, and then walking to the other side of the building, entering a different doorway than the one I exited from. It actually worked (distraction and neural growth). Will it work for everyone? Simple logic: heyl no. Just did for me.
You've hit on my major problem with people in terms of communication, which leads to my Human relationship dysfunction as a whole... I can verbally explain logic and disconnect from emotion when speaking to an individual that has the ability to concur AND the patience on top of that. That's quite a rare and lucky situation for me to be in. Hence, I'm a talker. Add to that the speed and DEEP analysis I follow logical trails of and you've got me saying things that don't make sense to people because they're following their own paths (or just attacking and trying to win what I don't look at as an argument, but they do).
I'm babbling again. What I was getting at is that I can help people get through the rough if they want the help, but that's a can of worms that isn't going to he opened without the worms turning into hornets. Chew on that one;) Communication with me is a good and distracting event, so I might be helpful, but that also requires trust that I have "the answer," if you will.
I speak when I have something I see as useful, but you know how Humans talk and relate. I just end up laughing in the end. You'd be surprised without spending a LOT of time with me and watching it, but you oughtta see how many people yell at me and argue, calling me an ass, idiot, loser, whatever. In the end, a rough 80% of those people end up succeeding by using what I was talking to them about.
That's one thing laughter comes from, especially because I don't consider myself superior at all. There's another one to chew on.
I'm wasting your time now if you're still reading, so I'll shut up. Thanks for the nice reply and additional variable/information!:)))
Okay, read up on it and received your example. What is it you're trying to get at with information wanting to be free? ( btw, this is a question, not an attack:) )
I would interpret that as Humans wanting to ensure that information is shared, based on their own designs of communication methods to accomplish said task.
Some socials do begin with zeroes. My mother's does, actually.
Also, it's not on paper. Computers are filling in the leading zeroes so that any person working with it is seeing what it viewed as a social and not some weird data error.
Is there something I'm missing here? I've been doing some through reading on this and I'd like to know if you've got something else.
Hit. My counter to the other reply you received (definitely not you) is based on 30 years of psychology and neurology exposure, analysis, and research (but I am NOT a doctor):
Neurons release chemicals to encourage the inter-neural firings. The more it's done, the more the neurons adjust to allow / encourage the pathways that have been developed.
Simply put, once you're addicted to something, it's hard to stop. When you smoke, you inhale chemicals that can pass through the blood-brain barrier and affect the neurons, (read up on it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine). Dopamine is one of the key introductions that your brain adjusts to and gets addicted to.
Dopamine is introduced by things that one finds pleasurable, hence encouragement. Encouragement is also a form of chemical affect to the inter-neural firing, and is a form of addiction. It's hard for one to stop because your brain is asking for more of what it's missing.
In the end, you're addicted to whatever you're addicted to because of chemical introduction and the brain's increased level of counter-action. Regardless of whether or not you brought chemicals in that caused other chemical reactions or did something that released epinephrine, norepinephrine, dopamine (down the line we go...), or you excited yourself by mystery, learning, combat between individuals or ideas, etc.
It's ALL chemical-based. ALL OF IT. The way to stop is, guess what? To stop the introduction, and have your life based on feelings and objections SUCK for a while, until your brain adjusts and doesn't require it or lean toward it in bias anymore.
Simple logic.
Short version: quit stuff and let your life suck until it doesn't suck anymore.;)
BTW you're reading from an ex-smoker of two packs per day here. I also have a hyper-efficient liver which has been the root of 3x chemical introduction requirement before it shows up at a whatever-you-call-that medicinal gap. In other words, with blood analysis, I need to take 3 times the normal dose before it's at the proper level of agreement. Because of this, I have a hard time getting drunk and completely lost the interest in alcohol. Do what you want to with that when you're considering the math of addiction. If it ain't fun, it ain't something you go after.
Quitting was easy when it came to nicotine. I quit cold-turkey and had life suck for about a month and a quarter. After that, I could smoke a cig and not have it do much short-term damage, but I consider the downside of the taste and smell of clothing and am actually more toward the NO side than the OK-I'll-take-one side.
I am *NOT* a doctor, again. I know how it works tho, so bring it on, all ya people who love to attack for the sake of attacking something you can disprove or dispute fractions of simply for the sake of excitement and self-worth. Guess what, that's an addiction, too, learned over a long time. See if you can do the research and figure out what chemical and action/reaction logical group it's based on, and easy to repair. Oh, and for the record, I'm also aware of the number of people that will get pissed and want to deny it based on their desire to be the winner. Oh, and there are those who love to take the fact that I just pointed that out and claim that it never existed and they were just fine with what I said. Some of the ones who understood what I said and agree will lose interest in responding because they don't want to be analyzed whether they are intelligent or not. There are those who will read and agree and reply. There are those who will read that I'm expecting replies of any type and no reply at all and refuse to reply simply to avoid which they are. Other are bored out of their mind, by reading my analysis and understanding of the Human mind. OOOOH, some want to respond now because they do
Let's say that talking about possible outcomes due to possible solutions, regarding something that we personally don't like, is the element of idiocy and a call for argumentative discussion.
We aren't able to discuss things with our opinions and do the "normal" give-and-take that a reasonable person would involve themselves in anymore, oh, no no no. We must come up with elements of idiocy ourselves and say that those are fact and the-end because we, ourselves, came up with it.
Gotta love people who go back and forth just to make sure they're always the last one making a statement. Find those everywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Your wit keeps me reading. ;)
With the lack of that, we have to fall back on what we see happening in other industries and situations.
Oh, that is such short-sighted crud.
Another thing that causes problems in the Human mindset is the lack of deep analysis of situations in order to save time. If you don't have the time to think about it, I don't think you have much useful support to give it.
I'm *NOT* saying you're wrong, and I'm *NOT* saying you're right. Think or do like most of the seeking-only-happiness people do and move on at hyper-ADD speed to something else. This is way too deep.
You got my attention, though, so good job!!! :D
Maybe he's trying to woo the woman who pointed it out to him and suggested he should write an article.
That's the best way to get in bed with a woman. Show her all of the wonderful things you agree with her on. ...until that day comes when you both start letting the truth about yourselves out.
This is totally smartass, of course. I'm sure you get the point being made. *ahem* Idea.
Oh, I should mention before I move on... I get the observational assumption that I'm a gay male based on my username. poofmeisterp.
Let me sing you a song to remind you of the past and where my first-reaction username may have come from.... *ahem*
"I love CheesyPoofs, you love CheesyPoofs; if we didn' love CheesyPoofs.. weeee'd beeeeee.. laaaaaaaaaaaaame. Like Night Court fifth season laaaaaaaaame! Yahh."
But that makes me gay. Mmmhmm. Indeedily-doo.
No, we are definitely assumed to be men if we don't...well, basically, if we don't come out of the closet about being women.
Heh.. Yeah. Last time I checked, most people intuitively consider nurses to be female (less than in the past, but still do). They consider firemen to be men, until you see the woman pullin' that uniform up on-scene. You consider the garbage men to be men, until you see a woman.
On and on ad nauseum. In the end, in how many places do we see someone of the unexpected gender and do a double-take with "What are you doing here?"
Last time I did that was.... Oh, wait. I never did that. I must be a weirdo. ;)
Has this moron ever considered that maybe, just maybe, women don't happen to be interested in coding?
Moron aside, you make a keen observation. If I recall, the last time I actually went on boards looking for technical information and code snippets, I saw VERY few women. The ones that did exist had men going ga-ga for them. Like the real workplace.
"I met a woman today. She's an experienced coder and is part of our team now. I can't think straight. I lost track of what I was saying.. Sorry.. Where was I?"
I like the response to your post referring to it as Satanism.
Let's look back at some lack of engineering double-checks, and/or other observations from the past. I see some jet aircraft failing and killing all onboard, I see viruses released in food and people getting very ill and some dying from it, I see "medical misadventures," not to quote George Carlin...
Not checking what you consider to be fact doesn't just save time, it introduces potential missed failure points and possible harm to people and property.
That's Satanism? Ooookay... I'm lost. Psh.
Only thing?
My personal anecdotes and observations ARE data.
They're not the ONLY data, and not the definitive truth.
Why ignore parts of all data in Human definition, when Human observation and learning have resulted in the sets of data we consider the most factual or positive, today?
I'm glad you got an upped score on this one.
In school, I learned how to debate the lessons of teachers. I'd ask them how they came to this conclusion as the finite answer, and where they gathered their information from. Instead of the knowledgeable (IMHO) "we don't have all of the answers yet, but this is the most agreed-upon and chosen point of truth," I would get "GET OUT OF MY CLASSROOM. GO TO THE OFFICE!"
*gasp*
"But, but, but... I was thinking about it and there's a missing aspect o..."
"GEETTTT OOOOUUTTTT!!!!!"
Podium is yours. ;)
It's quite like a lot of events in the Human life time:
1. If you take a chance at things turning out well, you may succeed or lose, and people will like and dislike you, depending on their tendencies.
2. If you don't take a chance, you may be missing out on a possibly great opportunity, or may have avoided a bad opportunity. Either way, you will feel "this way or that" about the outcome. Depends on what you find out about it later and/or how much you think about it.
Conclusion:
If you listen to your brain when the right hemisphere interacts with the left and gives you that "warning" indicator, there is a reason, based on your knowledge and life experience. If you go after something that you feel may be of a threat to you, then you will always be worried that there is a possible negative outcome on the horizon, regardless of the current conditions. Opposed to that concept, if you "go with your gut instinct" and don't take the opportunity, you will also be concerned that you missed something that may have been the best career choice in life.
The best choice (IMHO and based on my near-death) is to live life and ignore the "what ifs." Go with your gut instincts and spend time, but not too much time, solving analytical issues that may provide you with better answers as your life matures.
Something's nagging you right now to be concerned about this being a possible threat. That means (again, IMHO) that this one isn't for you. Keep looking, but don't stop learning. It may change in the future, or may not.
Wow, the whole concept in and of itself is a gamble. You know what I mean :)
Don't teach people things! Blasphemy!
Amen, bro. F'real.
Clarification: was referring to the analysis of the operation and using existing information to assist. In my case, I knew that it was going to "suck" to quit smoking because of the numbers. The opposite in my case is the fact that I have the lovely (and horrid) disorder of Asperger's. Logic alone helped me understand what I was feeling and why; I could therefore displace myself from those feelings and convert them to objects in the mental sense, e.g. calling a friend or family member for a five minute conversation that started with "DAMNIT!!!!!"
Converting the "need fer-a-smoke" to an object (in the sense applicable) of a word or action like walking outside to my smoke spot, and then walking to the other side of the building, entering a different doorway than the one I exited from. It actually worked (distraction and neural growth). Will it work for everyone? Simple logic: heyl no. Just did for me.
You've hit on my major problem with people in terms of communication, which leads to my Human relationship dysfunction as a whole... I can verbally explain logic and disconnect from emotion when speaking to an individual that has the ability to concur AND the patience on top of that. That's quite a rare and lucky situation for me to be in. Hence, I'm a talker. Add to that the speed and DEEP analysis I follow logical trails of and you've got me saying things that don't make sense to people because they're following their own paths (or just attacking and trying to win what I don't look at as an argument, but they do).
I'm babbling again. What I was getting at is that I can help people get through the rough if they want the help, but that's a can of worms that isn't going to he opened without the worms turning into hornets. Chew on that one ;) Communication with me is a good and distracting event, so I might be helpful, but that also requires trust that I have "the answer," if you will.
I speak when I have something I see as useful, but you know how Humans talk and relate. I just end up laughing in the end. You'd be surprised without spending a LOT of time with me and watching it, but you oughtta see how many people yell at me and argue, calling me an ass, idiot, loser, whatever. In the end, a rough 80% of those people end up succeeding by using what I was talking to them about.
That's one thing laughter comes from, especially because I don't consider myself superior at all. There's another one to chew on.
I'm wasting your time now if you're still reading, so I'll shut up. Thanks for the nice reply and additional variable/information! :)))
Sorry about the delay; I've been kinda ill.
Okay, read up on it and received your example. What is it you're trying to get at with information wanting to be free? ( btw, this is a question, not an attack :) )
I would interpret that as Humans wanting to ensure that information is shared, based on their own designs of communication methods to accomplish said task.
Could you explain?
You made my day. No, week. :D
Some socials do begin with zeroes. My mother's does, actually.
Also, it's not on paper. Computers are filling in the leading zeroes so that any person working with it is seeing what it viewed as a social and not some weird data error.
Is there something I'm missing here? I've been doing some through reading on this and I'd like to know if you've got something else.
Oh, this should be fun.
Let's wait and see if they accept a computer/operator glitch and fix it and pay to help out those who were harmed.
Oh, sorry.. This is reality. My bad. Nothing happened; this is all a nothing but a fallacy by whoever/whomever came up with it.
SORRY, GOVERNMENTAL PRESS DISCUSSION IS OVER! Enjoy some NyQuil on your way out of the building! Good day! *run*
*snort* lol
...You might as well tell me to
Just.
Quit.
Smoking.
Hit. My counter to the other reply you received (definitely not you) is based on 30 years of psychology and neurology exposure, analysis, and research (but I am NOT a doctor):
Neurons release chemicals to encourage the inter-neural firings. The more it's done, the more the neurons adjust to allow / encourage the pathways that have been developed.
Simply put, once you're addicted to something, it's hard to stop. When you smoke, you inhale chemicals that can pass through the blood-brain barrier and affect the neurons, (read up on it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine). Dopamine is one of the key introductions that your brain adjusts to and gets addicted to.
Dopamine is introduced by things that one finds pleasurable, hence encouragement. Encouragement is also a form of chemical affect to the inter-neural firing, and is a form of addiction. It's hard for one to stop because your brain is asking for more of what it's missing.
In the end, you're addicted to whatever you're addicted to because of chemical introduction and the brain's increased level of counter-action. Regardless of whether or not you brought chemicals in that caused other chemical reactions or did something that released epinephrine, norepinephrine, dopamine (down the line we go...), or you excited yourself by mystery, learning, combat between individuals or ideas, etc.
It's ALL chemical-based. ALL OF IT. The way to stop is, guess what? To stop the introduction, and have your life based on feelings and objections SUCK for a while, until your brain adjusts and doesn't require it or lean toward it in bias anymore.
Simple logic.
Short version: quit stuff and let your life suck until it doesn't suck anymore. ;)
BTW you're reading from an ex-smoker of two packs per day here. I also have a hyper-efficient liver which has been the root of 3x chemical introduction requirement before it shows up at a whatever-you-call-that medicinal gap. In other words, with blood analysis, I need to take 3 times the normal dose before it's at the proper level of agreement. Because of this, I have a hard time getting drunk and completely lost the interest in alcohol. Do what you want to with that when you're considering the math of addiction. If it ain't fun, it ain't something you go after.
Quitting was easy when it came to nicotine. I quit cold-turkey and had life suck for about a month and a quarter. After that, I could smoke a cig and not have it do much short-term damage, but I consider the downside of the taste and smell of clothing and am actually more toward the NO side than the OK-I'll-take-one side.
I am *NOT* a doctor, again. I know how it works tho, so bring it on, all ya people who love to attack for the sake of attacking something you can disprove or dispute fractions of simply for the sake of excitement and self-worth. Guess what, that's an addiction, too, learned over a long time. See if you can do the research and figure out what chemical and action/reaction logical group it's based on, and easy to repair. Oh, and for the record, I'm also aware of the number of people that will get pissed and want to deny it based on their desire to be the winner. Oh, and there are those who love to take the fact that I just pointed that out and claim that it never existed and they were just fine with what I said. Some of the ones who understood what I said and agree will lose interest in responding because they don't want to be analyzed whether they are intelligent or not. There are those who will read and agree and reply. There are those who will read that I'm expecting replies of any type and no reply at all and refuse to reply simply to avoid which they are. Other are bored out of their mind, by reading my analysis and understanding of the Human mind. OOOOH, some want to respond now because they do
How about
Re: Start ..unless it, in and of itself, is a JavaScript virus. ;)
Something to chew on.
Seventh and ninth amendments.
Could you please make a general statement?
*snort snort*
Let's say that talking about possible outcomes due to possible solutions, regarding something that we personally don't like, is the element of idiocy and a call for argumentative discussion.
We aren't able to discuss things with our opinions and do the "normal" give-and-take that a reasonable person would involve themselves in anymore, oh, no no no. We must come up with elements of idiocy ourselves and say that those are fact and the-end because we, ourselves, came up with it.
Gotta love people who go back and forth just to make sure they're always the last one making a statement. Find those everywhere.
Good call on your part making this post!
But, mcgrew, what about the poor shareholders?
They might have to reduce their paid lawn and garden service from four times per month to two.
How will we ever, ever get by?
Ah shiz, whoa, almost had a panic attack. Had some auditory memory relapse of something like, uh, Millennium, or something.
What's that supposed to mean? *smirk*
When an economy collapses at the beginning of your term of office, and soars at the end of it, it was your *blank* idea.
Fill in the blank. ;)