altruism is not a "savings account" and doesn't "kick-in out of guilt". that is precisely the opposite of altruism, which is giving or acting even in the face of significant risk to one's self.
what the parent describes has far more akin to game theory, specifically tit-for-tat models.
as for the guilt argument, i can only hope that i never get stuck in a tight jam with pieterh, and no one is watching. we see in others what we see in ourselves.
interesting? perhaps, but in an off topic way. incorrect? totally.
while you are right to say that it is different from ant fishing, it is worlds away in more than one sense. these chimps are geographically displaced from the ant fishing chimps. it is unique development, not just an extension of an existing one. in that way, it is as important as humans independently developing a cultural system that includes writing on different continents - in the absence of outside influence, e.g., us, it would be interesting to return in a few million years or so and see what the difference is in success between these chimps and say, the bonobos or goodall's chimps.
Hell no it doesn't. A little understanding may equal trust -- which leads to all the sorts of horrors that are routinely chronicled in the RISKS digest, and the kind of crap that Microsoft puts out.
actually, a little understanding is the most dangerous thing of all. false courage results, false feelings of infallability. get a grip, and check out the other famous quote (OTQ)[possibly paraphrased]: " a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
I'm not trying to troll here...but hear me out: People simply don't trust electronic voting...as a geek this makes me very sad, because voting is something that could and should be more automated.
Now, ask yourself, why is it that people don't trust comptuers?
now ask yourself, why is it that the vast majority of voters use computers, if at all, with distrust? check the voting records out. does your father/mother use a computer much? if so, how much do you help them with it? my point being, how well do they understand it? understanding=trust
Answer: Microsoft's abhorent trackrecord with regard to security has an awful lot to do with it. It's not the only factor, but it is *huge*.
FUD. the majority of users do not even understand when they have been compromised, much less why. otherwise, M$ patch system may have worked reasonably well.
All these windows bugs do effect us linux geeks: The perception of computers in general has suffered greatly.
ahhh, the nub of your argument - linux rules, all else must be shite, especially M$. with all due respect to your beliefs, this is a non-starter as an argument. honestly, if linux gets up there in terms of usage, do you seriously expect majority of the users to understand it anymore than windows? remember, DOS and windows x were once relatively low-distribution programs as well, promoted by enthusiatic geeks.
Though there are some places (like Ireland, I've heard tell) where simply predicting rain every day will be correct 80% of the time.
There is nothing special about predicting rain, or any other given weather, in a place with strong statistical trends, eg your example, such as predicting rain in Prince Rupert (B.C.), or say snowfall in Phoenix. The whole point about developing this field is being able to predict the unusual and severe weather, weather that might cost lives, livestock, money, danger, whatever. The rest is just gravy, IMHO.
Coupled with the fact that nobody expects weathermen to be right anyway, must be a great living.
Imagine a nuclear physicist saying, "You know, it's funny, but yesterday all indications were that today was going to be a smooth day for our reactor. How about that, eh?"
Well said, but personally, I don't expect weather forecasters to be right, per se. I expect that they will give me the worst case scenario, so that I can be prepared but pleasantly surprised. These days, I am rarely disappointed.
Slashdot Mirror
no doot aboot it! mod parent up, eh? better than the canadarm
altruism is not a "savings account" and doesn't "kick-in out of guilt". that is precisely the opposite of altruism, which is giving or acting even in the face of significant risk to one's self.
what the parent describes has far more akin to game theory, specifically tit-for-tat models.
as for the guilt argument, i can only hope that i never get stuck in a tight jam with pieterh, and no one is watching. we see in others what we see in ourselves.
interesting? perhaps, but in an off topic way. incorrect? totally.
while you are right to say that it is different from ant fishing, it is worlds away in more than one sense. these chimps are geographically displaced from the ant fishing chimps. it is unique development, not just an extension of an existing one. in that way, it is as important as humans independently developing a cultural system that includes writing on different continents - in the absence of outside influence, e.g., us, it would be interesting to return in a few million years or so and see what the difference is in success between these chimps and say, the bonobos or goodall's chimps.
what is this thing you call a "ticking" watch?
Hell no it doesn't. A little understanding may equal trust -- which leads to all the sorts of horrors that are routinely chronicled in the RISKS digest, and the kind of crap that Microsoft puts out.
actually, a little understanding is the most dangerous thing of all. false courage results, false feelings of infallability. get a grip, and check out the other famous quote (OTQ)[possibly paraphrased]:
" a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
I'm not trying to troll here...but hear me out: People simply don't trust electronic voting...as a geek this makes me very sad, because voting is something that could and should be more automated.
Now, ask yourself, why is it that people don't trust comptuers?
now ask yourself, why is it that the vast majority of voters use computers, if at all, with distrust? check the voting records out. does your father/mother use a computer much? if so, how much do you help them with it? my point being, how well do they understand it? understanding=trust
Answer: Microsoft's abhorent trackrecord with regard to security has an awful lot to do with it. It's not the only factor, but it is *huge*.
FUD. the majority of users do not even understand when they have been compromised, much less why. otherwise, M$ patch system may have worked reasonably well.
All these windows bugs do effect us linux geeks: The perception of computers in general has suffered greatly.
ahhh, the nub of your argument - linux rules, all else must be shite, especially M$. with all due respect to your beliefs, this is a non-starter as an argument. honestly, if linux gets up there in terms of usage, do you seriously expect majority of the users to understand it anymore than windows? remember, DOS and windows x were once relatively low-distribution programs as well, promoted by enthusiatic geeks.
at cafepress.com.
so now you can hear your scream and wear it, too.
Isn't "nearbroadband" almost the same concept as being "almost pregnant"?
see below...
But the term "broadband" has come to mean "fast" in the common language. Thank the media for that.
well if yer that fast...you are far more likely to be pregnant, than not, no?
Though there are some places (like Ireland, I've heard tell) where simply predicting rain every day will be correct 80% of the time. There is nothing special about predicting rain, or any other given weather, in a place with strong statistical trends, eg your example, such as predicting rain in Prince Rupert (B.C.), or say snowfall in Phoenix. The whole point about developing this field is being able to predict the unusual and severe weather, weather that might cost lives, livestock, money, danger, whatever. The rest is just gravy, IMHO.
Damn, and I just used the last of my mod points two hours ago!
Mod this up!
Coupled with the fact that nobody expects weathermen to be right anyway, must be a great living. Imagine a nuclear physicist saying, "You know, it's funny, but yesterday all indications were that today was going to be a smooth day for our reactor. How about that, eh?"
Well said, but personally, I don't expect weather forecasters to be right, per se. I expect that they will give me the worst case scenario, so that I can be prepared but pleasantly surprised. These days, I am rarely disappointed.