This has parallels with what I am learning in medical school (yes, a med student who reads slashdot *gasp*).
We are taught that we cannot use medical jargon to explain things to patients, because our level of training and experience is completely different from that of the average patient.
This is also true in software, but I don't think developers are taught this point. This often results in the user not understanding what may have been obvious to the software designer, and a program that is not popular with the public.
In both fields, I feel one must think at the level of the end user. In medicine, it is to provide the best health outcome by promoting understanding. We do this because we recognize that not everyone is health literate. In software, I think to be successful, it is also important to recognize that not everyone is tech literate, and design products accordingly.
Serratia marcescens is responsible for some pretty nasty pneumonias in hospitalized patients (I've seen quite a few cases in ICU's). That pink stain on the shower curtain they refer to turns into a dark red glob of sputum. It is also the cause of some urinary tract infections. In addition, they are also occasionally resistant to certain antimicrobials.
So what's happened is that no-one can figure out how to use software to identify images, so the huge corporations have decided to use the power of the human brain to do their work for them for free.
Operant conditioning and positive reinforcement gets you to do what they want you to by giving you "points". Nice trick.
so what's happened it that no-one can figure out how to use software to identify images, so the huge corporations have decided to use the power of the human brain to do their work for them for free.
positive reinforcement added by giving you "points".
dance, monkeys, dance.
When? When will it end?
When we stop electing leaders who answer to the checkbooks of big donors (corporations, etc.), and instead answer to the people.
I have to say, as a medical student, that I am quite excited about the possibilities presented by this type of research. To be able to conduct research on tissue systems that are more human will provide better models for treatment of disease in humans. Thus making medicine more effective and safer.
That being said, I am appalled at the prospect of ANY form of human hervous system running around in ANY other type of creature.
True, it could provide tremendous insight into how the human brain works. However, it is my belief that the brian is the center of our humanity. It is the seat of who we are as a species, and is unique in the world. To artificially develop this type of tissue in an animal mode really seems to be an ethical misjudgement. A public backlash to this type of research could jeopardize research in general, which would be a disservice to the scientific community.
I said it this morning. I sure am glad the FBI could take some time of their busy schedule of fighting terrorism to perform this incredably important national security task.
I know I'll rest easier tonight knowing that copyrighted works are that much safer.
Sheesh!
You know, the ancient technology of music being broadcast FOR FREE over the airwaves? I can even hook up a recording device and copy 'till my little heart's content, RIAA be damned. And there's no way they could ever touch me for this!!!
Slashdot Mirror
This has parallels with what I am learning in medical school (yes, a med student who reads slashdot *gasp*). We are taught that we cannot use medical jargon to explain things to patients, because our level of training and experience is completely different from that of the average patient. This is also true in software, but I don't think developers are taught this point. This often results in the user not understanding what may have been obvious to the software designer, and a program that is not popular with the public. In both fields, I feel one must think at the level of the end user. In medicine, it is to provide the best health outcome by promoting understanding. We do this because we recognize that not everyone is health literate. In software, I think to be successful, it is also important to recognize that not everyone is tech literate, and design products accordingly.
Serratia marcescens is responsible for some pretty nasty pneumonias in hospitalized patients (I've seen quite a few cases in ICU's). That pink stain on the shower curtain they refer to turns into a dark red glob of sputum. It is also the cause of some urinary tract infections. In addition, they are also occasionally resistant to certain antimicrobials.
So what's happened is that no-one can figure out how to use software to identify images, so the huge corporations have decided to use the power of the human brain to do their work for them for free. Operant conditioning and positive reinforcement gets you to do what they want you to by giving you "points". Nice trick.
so what's happened it that no-one can figure out how to use software to identify images, so the huge corporations have decided to use the power of the human brain to do their work for them for free. positive reinforcement added by giving you "points". dance, monkeys, dance.
When? When will it end? When we stop electing leaders who answer to the checkbooks of big donors (corporations, etc.), and instead answer to the people.
I have to say, as a medical student, that I am quite excited about the possibilities presented by this type of research. To be able to conduct research on tissue systems that are more human will provide better models for treatment of disease in humans. Thus making medicine more effective and safer. That being said, I am appalled at the prospect of ANY form of human hervous system running around in ANY other type of creature. True, it could provide tremendous insight into how the human brain works. However, it is my belief that the brian is the center of our humanity. It is the seat of who we are as a species, and is unique in the world. To artificially develop this type of tissue in an animal mode really seems to be an ethical misjudgement. A public backlash to this type of research could jeopardize research in general, which would be a disservice to the scientific community.
I said it this morning. I sure am glad the FBI could take some time of their busy schedule of fighting terrorism to perform this incredably important national security task. I know I'll rest easier tonight knowing that copyrighted works are that much safer. Sheesh!
Thank goodness they took time out from their busy schedule of preventing terrorism for this little adventure. I'm sure feeling a lot safer now.
A strategy like this will only serve to discourage legit online music purchases, and throw fuel onto the fire of P2P illegal file sharing.
And yet it was a smash hit in the mid-'80s, recieving quite a bit of airtime on MTV and the radio.
Maybe he did realize it would. But he's pretty smart by not coming out and saying it in public.
You know, the ancient technology of music being broadcast FOR FREE over the airwaves?
I can even hook up a recording device and copy 'till my little heart's content, RIAA be damned.
And there's no way they could ever touch me for this!!!