Some of the early self-report inventories to determine negative personality characteristics like psychopathy/antisocial personality were pretty easy not to trip up on (e.g., having fun is more important than doing a good job, I like to cut corners, I'm always bored, I am opinionated, I have stolen something, etc.). Of course, only idiots would make it clear that they were slotfully lazy, inclined to cheat and steal when they can get away with it, and admit to getting into fights and shirking all responsibility.
The personality tests are getting sneakier so that people will admit to personality traits they have that may not always be positive. For example, many psychopaths have a way with words and consider themselves devilishly persuasive. They can always get their way. They may see themselves as merely "determined" and "competitive" and not egocentric and aggressive. If they consistently reveal psychopathic personality traits while being relatively low on opposing traits (like interpersonal agreeableness, emotional sensitivity, conscientiousness, etc.), their personality may be considered "high risk" for hire.
I understand why the site's called Failed Success. It succeeds at failing to be funny, quite well at that. Is it just me, or do Slashdotters seem to have a pretty unfunny sense of humor?
If you consider the evolution of component architectures, the evolution of programming for the Microsoft platforms is a little more complicated. Really, the Microsoft.NET platform is just a replacement for COM and the Win32 API and is inspired by Sun Microsystems' Java platform. COM and ActiveX controls stem from the older OLE (Object Linking and Embedding) and VBX (Visual Basic eXtensions).
You people with your attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder think you're the big shit with your ability to annoy the teacher, jump off walls, and forget what you were saying. It's not like that anymore. Enter Asperger's syndrome, the new heavyweight added by the American Psychiatric Association to their bible of mental conditions in 1994. Now you hyper freaks have true competition!
We aspies have an inordinate amount of interest in obscure things (for example, French phonology has been one of mine); we are utterly oblivious to our social environment; and we can be downright obnoxious for no good reason. Many of us are hypochondriacs who seem to have a lengthy list of other neurodevelopmental and even physical problems (not me, however). You just can't compare to us for patheticness and a sense of entitlement--needing to have the NeuroTypical (NT) world to adapt to our idiosyncrasies.
Okay, I went to that Origami Project website, and it loaded a Flash animation that floated the words 'Touch me' on a mod blue background. I immediately clicked back.
Does this technology need to gain fame through sexual undertones?
The whole premise of Rep. Tom Lantos's question is ridiculous. A corporation is not a human being capable of experiencing shame, remorse, joy, love, sympathy, sadness, or any of that. A corporation knows only its revenue and stock values. Any executive or spokesperson's expression of shame should rightly ring hollow.
It's not that some Microsoft or Google executives or employees might not personally feel ashamed of some things their company has done, but the company itself is cold and unfeeling. It is not human like you or me. It is an artifice, a person animated by law alone.
You are quite right. The standards are always playing catchup with what the RDBMS vendors have done; thus, the standards are a compromise rather than a consensus. Nevertheless, I would welcome one standard vendors actually followed that meant I could make relatively simple databases without running into subtle incompatibilities.
- You can't easily migrate to another database-vendor. Maybe you want to switch. Maybe you have to because of technical reasons. Maybe you have to because your company is being bought by another, which uses a different system and wants to maintain only one platform. Whatever the reason, your stored procedure is going to really, really hurt.
The problem is right now none of the relational database management system vendors follow a common syntax for these kinds of advanced features. The SQL 2003 standard specifies the proper syntax for stored procedures and stored functions, yet the actual implementations diverge with their own SQL dialects (Oracle's PL/SQL, Sybase and Microsoft's Transact-SQL, etc.). Not even MySQL follows the standards to the letter (for example, AUTO_INCREMENT is not the standard way to create an automatically incrementing field of data).
After taking my first database class for computer science, I was truly shocked by two things: this lack of standardization support (no doubt to encourage vendor lockin) and the sheer kludgery of SQL syntax.
I can understand why he noted Ruby as a primary contender with Java. I've been learning it from an online primer, and it seems quite flexible and elegant. Java, on the other hand, is much too bloated.
Actually, my dealings with women typically crash and burn within minutes of beginning discussion. I really find it hard to know what other people are interested in or even what they might find relevant. In another case, I met a woman who ended up taking advantage of me (not sexually) for her own amusement; I didn't suspect her intentions could be bad.
Actually, Professor Simon Baron-Cohen theorizes two factors of cognitive skill: systemizing and empathizing. People who are better at empathizing are social, able to read other people's emotions, etc. Systemizers are analytical, oriented towards details and routine, etc. He measures the two as a systemizing quotient (SQ) and an empathizing quotient (EQ). There are tests online to measure these.
As an individual diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, I don't find this to be news. I have seen at least a few people who might have Asperger's syndrome in my computer science classes. I cannot say I am attracted to this type, though, and have not met many women who behave stereotypically autistically.
Anyway, I like being oblivious to certain elements, particularly nonverbal cues, of the social environment. It means my dealings with women frequently end up in great disaster.
A polygraph measures certain physiological signs of anxiety (galvanic skin conductance, pulse rate, respiration rate, dilation of pupils, and other signs of autonomic nervous system arousal). This fMRI looks for patterns of brain activity. The idea is that it takes certain areas of the brain more work (i.e., increased bloodflow) to inhibit the truthtelling response and create a lie. This does not have to do with autonomic nervous system activation.
Perhaps the best way to "beat" this machine would be to have a fuzzy recollection of all events so that it would take approximately equal thought to remember the truth or to tell a lie and the subject would not even be aware of the accuracy of what he or she is saying. Another way, maybe, would be to have a story already made so that it would take less work to recall this fabrication than to generate one on the spot.
The questions are asked twice, so it's obviously important to remain consistent, too.
You're assuming that the UK powers that be wnat intellignet people. They don't. What they want is unquestioning masses who blindly accept government social programs, centralized monitary policy, and poor government finance.
If I'm not mistaken, that's the plot of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four!
Lie detector tests are premised on the probability that people will experience anxiety when lying. Of course, some people are more susceptible to anxiety than others. Generally nervous people might experience the anxiety that causes these voice microtremors without actually lying.
On the other hand, people can fairly easily be trained to pass lie detector tests while still lying. Psychopaths in particular, many of whom are constitutionally underreactive to certain stressors (search Google for "deficient affective experience"), tend to be able to lie without the slightest trace of anxiety. This is mainly because psychopaths have an entirely self-centered attitude and thus no moral qualms about lying, stealing, or doing anything to people to get what they want or to serve their own twisted brand of justice. Note that one type of psychopath (the so-called secondary psychopath) is hypersensitive to stress; these are the common-criminal/reckless type.
My guess is that psychopathic individuals would be attracted to international terrorism. Osama bin Laden, for example, is almost certainly a psychopath. Therefore, these lie detector tests will be less effective against the people most likely to do harm!
I know the meme about Slashdotters and their crazy tin foil hats is almost as old as Slashdot itself (it really is getting old, guys), but how common is genuine paranoia among people who read and make posts to Slashdot? I myself am not of the suspicious variety, but I have no doubt that some people here tend towards a more suspicious and vigilant personality style.
To use the official psychiatric nomenclature, I am referring to paranoid personality disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, various delusional disorders, and some instances of schizotypal personality disorder (mild schizophrenia, basically). Antisocial (i.e., psychopathic or sociopathic) and narcissistic personality disorders tend to have elements of paranoia in them as well. How common are these conditions here? Am I in the naïvist minority here? Should I be afraid, very afraid?
A little paranoid schizophrenia from time to time isn't always such a bad thing; so say the voices inside my head!
Author's note: Kindly audience of Slashdot, please note with due consideration that I do not have paranoid schizophrenia. I sometimes like to write teh witticismz.
Anality (to the pedants out there in Slashdotland, obsessive-compulsive personality) is a very important quality to possess. Consider that the New York Times has included articles about Supreme Court candidates Roberts and Alito, mentioning their conservatism and characteristic anality.
On the other hand, you have these rebel but admittedly cunning linguists who vouch that language is as we use it. In their fog of grammatical relativism, a split infinitive is just as good as an unsplit one (and, presumably, split undies are equals to the uncleft variety); slang is how the vocabulary of a language evolves; and they say worse while calling it all science! No, thanks. I'll side with the prescriptivist grammarians like my good friend BTWR and scan all my writing for misplaced commas and make sure I am using my words with etymologically correct connotations. Plus, renowned cunning linguist Noam Chomsky is a damned hippi.
Gamers have several reasons to be less-than-satisfied with WoTC, compared to TSR, including:
Refocusing resources into creating entirely new realms (ie. Eberron) instead of updating much-loved and heavily-played pre-existing realms (ie. the Forgotten Realms).
Yeah, well, it's called Forgotten Realms for a reason now, isn't it?
Da Massive writes "The official release of OpenOffice.org 2.0 has been pushed to the download servers, as of Thursday the 10th."
The article is dated 20/10/2005, but they're in Australia! It's not some 20th month, 10th day. 20/10/2005 = 10/20/2005! It was released as of Thursday the 20th!
This isn't really new. Internet dating sites have had personality tests backed by actual psychological research for a long time. Instead of referring to the results in terms of personality traits like extroversion and conscientiousness, though, chemistry.com uses serotonin level, testosterone, etc. It's more gimmick than anything. For example, high levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin are theorized to be inversely associated with neuroticism (the personality trait of being prone to anxiety, fearful reactions, and emotional instability). Dominance/aggressiveness/competitiveness is as easily answered with a personality survey as with a measurement of a person's fingers. Actually, aggressive tendencies can be sublimated in a positively: working hard to support a cause one believes in, playing sports, etc. If a physical trait is used, it may offer an inaccurate picture of how that trait is expressed.
I really don't see what sets chemistry.com apart besides the angle they're taking. Personality is personality no matter what words you use to describe (serotonin and testosterone or contentment and social dominance).
It went fine if a little boring. We learned more about first-order logic in relation to artificial intelligence. Bill Gates never reared his evil face.
I watch next to no television anymore, and going back is harder than stopping! I haven't been following the digital broadcast signal controversy, so can anyone explain how it will annihilate television? Am I going to turn on a TV only to find nothing comes in all of a sudden? Every American won't be able to watch TV anymore? That sounds pretty good to me. Maybe people would have genuine conversations that extend beyond what they saw on TV.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the early self-report inventories to determine negative personality characteristics like psychopathy/antisocial personality were pretty easy not to trip up on (e.g., having fun is more important than doing a good job, I like to cut corners, I'm always bored, I am opinionated, I have stolen something, etc.). Of course, only idiots would make it clear that they were slotfully lazy, inclined to cheat and steal when they can get away with it, and admit to getting into fights and shirking all responsibility.
The personality tests are getting sneakier so that people will admit to personality traits they have that may not always be positive. For example, many psychopaths have a way with words and consider themselves devilishly persuasive. They can always get their way. They may see themselves as merely "determined" and "competitive" and not egocentric and aggressive. If they consistently reveal psychopathic personality traits while being relatively low on opposing traits (like interpersonal agreeableness, emotional sensitivity, conscientiousness, etc.), their personality may be considered "high risk" for hire.
I understand why the site's called Failed Success. It succeeds at failing to be funny, quite well at that. Is it just me, or do Slashdotters seem to have a pretty unfunny sense of humor?
If you consider the evolution of component architectures, the evolution of programming for the Microsoft platforms is a little more complicated. Really, the Microsoft .NET platform is just a replacement for COM and the Win32 API and is inspired by Sun Microsystems' Java platform. COM and ActiveX controls stem from the older OLE (Object Linking and Embedding) and VBX (Visual Basic eXtensions).
You people with your attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder think you're the big shit with your ability to annoy the teacher, jump off walls, and forget what you were saying. It's not like that anymore. Enter Asperger's syndrome, the new heavyweight added by the American Psychiatric Association to their bible of mental conditions in 1994. Now you hyper freaks have true competition!
We aspies have an inordinate amount of interest in obscure things (for example, French phonology has been one of mine); we are utterly oblivious to our social environment; and we can be downright obnoxious for no good reason. Many of us are hypochondriacs who seem to have a lengthy list of other neurodevelopmental and even physical problems (not me, however). You just can't compare to us for patheticness and a sense of entitlement--needing to have the NeuroTypical (NT) world to adapt to our idiosyncrasies.
Okay, I went to that Origami Project website, and it loaded a Flash animation that floated the words 'Touch me' on a mod blue background. I immediately clicked back.
Does this technology need to gain fame through sexual undertones?
The whole premise of Rep. Tom Lantos's question is ridiculous. A corporation is not a human being capable of experiencing shame, remorse, joy, love, sympathy, sadness, or any of that. A corporation knows only its revenue and stock values. Any executive or spokesperson's expression of shame should rightly ring hollow.
It's not that some Microsoft or Google executives or employees might not personally feel ashamed of some things their company has done, but the company itself is cold and unfeeling. It is not human like you or me. It is an artifice, a person animated by law alone.
You are quite right. The standards are always playing catchup with what the RDBMS vendors have done; thus, the standards are a compromise rather than a consensus. Nevertheless, I would welcome one standard vendors actually followed that meant I could make relatively simple databases without running into subtle incompatibilities.
Phooka.de (302970) wrote:
The problem is right now none of the relational database management system vendors follow a common syntax for these kinds of advanced features. The SQL 2003 standard specifies the proper syntax for stored procedures and stored functions, yet the actual implementations diverge with their own SQL dialects (Oracle's PL/SQL, Sybase and Microsoft's Transact-SQL, etc.). Not even MySQL follows the standards to the letter (for example, AUTO_INCREMENT is not the standard way to create an automatically incrementing field of data).
After taking my first database class for computer science, I was truly shocked by two things: this lack of standardization support (no doubt to encourage vendor lockin) and the sheer kludgery of SQL syntax.
I can understand why he noted Ruby as a primary contender with Java. I've been learning it from an online primer, and it seems quite flexible and elegant. Java, on the other hand, is much too bloated.
Elad Alon (835764) wrote:
Actually, my dealings with women typically crash and burn within minutes of beginning discussion. I really find it hard to know what other people are interested in or even what they might find relevant. In another case, I met a woman who ended up taking advantage of me (not sexually) for her own amusement; I didn't suspect her intentions could be bad.
Actually, Professor Simon Baron-Cohen theorizes two factors of cognitive skill: systemizing and empathizing. People who are better at empathizing are social, able to read other people's emotions, etc. Systemizers are analytical, oriented towards details and routine, etc. He measures the two as a systemizing quotient (SQ) and an empathizing quotient (EQ). There are tests online to measure these.
As an individual diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, I don't find this to be news. I have seen at least a few people who might have Asperger's syndrome in my computer science classes. I cannot say I am attracted to this type, though, and have not met many women who behave stereotypically autistically.
Anyway, I like being oblivious to certain elements, particularly nonverbal cues, of the social environment. It means my dealings with women frequently end up in great disaster.
A polygraph measures certain physiological signs of anxiety (galvanic skin conductance, pulse rate, respiration rate, dilation of pupils, and other signs of autonomic nervous system arousal). This fMRI looks for patterns of brain activity. The idea is that it takes certain areas of the brain more work (i.e., increased bloodflow) to inhibit the truthtelling response and create a lie. This does not have to do with autonomic nervous system activation.
Perhaps the best way to "beat" this machine would be to have a fuzzy recollection of all events so that it would take approximately equal thought to remember the truth or to tell a lie and the subject would not even be aware of the accuracy of what he or she is saying. Another way, maybe, would be to have a story already made so that it would take less work to recall this fabrication than to generate one on the spot.
The questions are asked twice, so it's obviously important to remain consistent, too.
Argoff (142580) wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, that's the plot of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four!
Lie detector tests are premised on the probability that people will experience anxiety when lying. Of course, some people are more susceptible to anxiety than others. Generally nervous people might experience the anxiety that causes these voice microtremors without actually lying.
On the other hand, people can fairly easily be trained to pass lie detector tests while still lying. Psychopaths in particular, many of whom are constitutionally underreactive to certain stressors (search Google for "deficient affective experience"), tend to be able to lie without the slightest trace of anxiety. This is mainly because psychopaths have an entirely self-centered attitude and thus no moral qualms about lying, stealing, or doing anything to people to get what they want or to serve their own twisted brand of justice. Note that one type of psychopath (the so-called secondary psychopath) is hypersensitive to stress; these are the common-criminal/reckless type.
My guess is that psychopathic individuals would be attracted to international terrorism. Osama bin Laden, for example, is almost certainly a psychopath. Therefore, these lie detector tests will be less effective against the people most likely to do harm!
I know the meme about Slashdotters and their crazy tin foil hats is almost as old as Slashdot itself (it really is getting old, guys), but how common is genuine paranoia among people who read and make posts to Slashdot? I myself am not of the suspicious variety, but I have no doubt that some people here tend towards a more suspicious and vigilant personality style.
To use the official psychiatric nomenclature, I am referring to paranoid personality disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, various delusional disorders, and some instances of schizotypal personality disorder (mild schizophrenia, basically). Antisocial (i.e., psychopathic or sociopathic) and narcissistic personality disorders tend to have elements of paranoia in them as well. How common are these conditions here? Am I in the naïvist minority here? Should I be afraid, very afraid?
A little paranoid schizophrenia from time to time isn't always such a bad thing; so say the voices inside my head!
Author's note: Kindly audience of Slashdot, please note with due consideration that I do not have paranoid schizophrenia. I sometimes like to write teh witticismz.
Anality (to the pedants out there in Slashdotland, obsessive-compulsive personality) is a very important quality to possess. Consider that the New York Times has included articles about Supreme Court candidates Roberts and Alito, mentioning their conservatism and characteristic anality.
On the other hand, you have these rebel but admittedly cunning linguists who vouch that language is as we use it. In their fog of grammatical relativism, a split infinitive is just as good as an unsplit one (and, presumably, split undies are equals to the uncleft variety); slang is how the vocabulary of a language evolves; and they say worse while calling it all science! No, thanks. I'll side with the prescriptivist grammarians like my good friend BTWR and scan all my writing for misplaced commas and make sure I am using my words with etymologically correct connotations. Plus, renowned cunning linguist Noam Chomsky is a damned hippi.
In short, back off from His Royal Anus!
But the abstract to the article makes them out to be evil, evil vermin bent on destroying free speech.
Yeah, well, it's called Forgotten Realms for a reason now, isn't it?
The article is dated 20/10/2005, but they're in Australia! It's not some 20th month, 10th day. 20/10/2005 = 10/20/2005! It was released as of Thursday the 20th!
Talk about careless editing and reading.
This isn't really new. Internet dating sites have had personality tests backed by actual psychological research for a long time. Instead of referring to the results in terms of personality traits like extroversion and conscientiousness, though, chemistry.com uses serotonin level, testosterone, etc. It's more gimmick than anything. For example, high levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin are theorized to be inversely associated with neuroticism (the personality trait of being prone to anxiety, fearful reactions, and emotional instability). Dominance/aggressiveness/competitiveness is as easily answered with a personality survey as with a measurement of a person's fingers. Actually, aggressive tendencies can be sublimated in a positively: working hard to support a cause one believes in, playing sports, etc. If a physical trait is used, it may offer an inaccurate picture of how that trait is expressed.
I really don't see what sets chemistry.com apart besides the angle they're taking. Personality is personality no matter what words you use to describe (serotonin and testosterone or contentment and social dominance).
It went fine if a little boring. We learned more about first-order logic in relation to artificial intelligence. Bill Gates never reared his evil face.
I was going to attend CS 480 tomorrow, but now I just don't know if it's worth the possibility of seeing the Evil One in person.
I watch next to no television anymore, and going back is harder than stopping! I haven't been following the digital broadcast signal controversy, so can anyone explain how it will annihilate television? Am I going to turn on a TV only to find nothing comes in all of a sudden? Every American won't be able to watch TV anymore? That sounds pretty good to me. Maybe people would have genuine conversations that extend beyond what they saw on TV.