I said in several of my posts I was not talking about insanity. Now I know you are not reading what I wrote. You are assuming what I wrote. I am not talking about being insane or having a mental illness. I was saying that having too much money affects people's thinking and behavior in negative ways. I wanted you to provide citations that purport that having huge sums of money does not affect people's reasoning, empathy, risk taking, etc. My original question was why do many really rich people seem to lose touch with reality and start saying and believing absurd things.
You can make your points without reference to me personally, and you know it. Yes, you did start with sarcasm and I accept your apology. I was not trying to be condescending, and I don't think I was. The topic I brought up was why do so many rich people seem to have trouble with reality. I fully understand that many regular (non-wealthy) people have a very poor grip on reality. But you would think that highly successful people with more money than God might be more rational. My contention, and you have provided no evidence to the contrary, is that they often seem to have less of a grip on reality than average people. Take a look at the book 'Dark Money" by Jane Mayer about the Koch family. Clearly, the money had a big effect on their view of the world and their thinking capabilities.
And believe me, your description of how the brain works is not from any neuroscientists that I have read. In fact, there is no single theory of how the brain functions from a single source. You need to read many, many papers from many sources to even come to a vague notion of how the brain functions. I would be happy to have a fuller discussion with you on that if you are interested. For example, what is your take on the so-called default mode of brain activity and the circuits involved? I would be very interested to hear your opinions on it.
I am a neuroscientist by trade and your description of the brain functioning is not particularly accurate nor helpful for the discussion. I was talking about the growing body of scientific literature that shows that money has negative effects on human cognition, everything from risk assessment and risk taking, to empathy toward others. I also maintain that it allows people to live in a fact free bubble even more easily than it is for people of modest means to be fact free. What I don't understand is why you need to keep bringing me into the discussion. Clearly you can't just discuss something without showing your irritation with others who disagree.
Finally! On topic and useful input. The lack of reality checks is probably key. Rich people are surrounded by yes men and women, and don't get challenged like most people do on a regular basis. Even some people here at/. don't want anything bad said about rich people. So between the lack of being challenged on stupid or crazy ideas, along with the narcissism and egos, you have a recipe for delusional or irrational thinking. I don't think they are crazy, I think their thinking abilities have been skewed by too much money, too much power, too little honest input from those around them and too much free time. Like Musk's hyperloop. It just isn't practical for sending people from one place to another, just to get their a little faster. What is so horrible about sitting on a high speed train for 2 or 3 hours.
You and the others have provided no proof for your statements. I already gave links, and could give many more that show that money affects people's thinking, their behavior towards others, their empathy and their decision making. These effects are well documented. You and the others only comment was that I had selection bias. You will never win a debate with that approach. You certainly haven't won this debate. So instead of talking about me, how about you talk about the effects or lack thereof of money on people's behavior and reasoning? Nah, you ain't got nothing. Prove me wrong and show me all those citations you have lined up that indicate that money does not have any deleterious effects on people's brains or behavior.
Again, ad hominem. Not one word about the topic. You clearly have nothing of substance to say. But that is not surprising. Can't wait for your next, off topic ad hominem.
The best options for now in my opinion are for people to stay in Earth orbit most of the time, and enjoy the nice magnetic bubble shield. Robots with telepresence can do the work further out until scientists and engineers get a handle on being in interplanetary space for long periods. For very long distance travel they really will need the spinning ring around a central core to provide artificial gravity, and that is going to make a big ship. Without the gravity people will lose bone and muscle mass even with various exercise regimes. We evolved with gravity as an essential aspect of life, and you really can't live properly without it. So for long distances and long flight times we need artificial gravity and full shielding in at least the parts of the ship where people spend their time. Dosimeters of some type will probably be useful.
Citations please. The research I have read indicates that lots of money makes people less empathic, less social and more irrational. And I was not talking about mental illness as you know, I was talking about delusional thinking. But go ahead and defend wealthy people without offering any information or citations.
Well, considering how many stories there have been about rich people showing signs of delusion, I am sticking with my point. You can't say I have selection bias based on no information whatsoever. That is off topic completely and you know it. Now Musk and Bezos say they are going to have a personal race to Mars. Again, it sounds delusional to me. Oh, sorry, that must just be selection bias. There is a strong tendency among some posters at/. to complain about the commenter, and bring up selection bias or the Dunning Kruger effect rather that sticking to the point of the discussion. I know it makes some people feel superior to say such things, but it is just a soft form of ad hominem, and it shows you have nothing to say about the actual discussion..
So maybe a double jacket would work. I am not an engineer, I am a neuroscientist, so I worry about the brain, and protecting that. I would never go to Mars myself unless there was full shielding against all significant radiation damage. I understand there are lots of people who wouldn't care because they think they can take it and survive, but the increased cancer risk and potential for brain damage should worry everyone.
You stated nothing, you offered no information. You just claimed I was biased. How is that intelligent or meaningful? Please, at least pretend you have something meaningful to say.
Face it, until they figure out how to fully shield the spacecraft, this is not practical for humans. It will probably require actual physical shielding if you really want to stop all harmful exposure. That means lots of heavy metal, which is not good for spacecraft getting into orbit. So it would have to be built in orbit. That means we are talking a long time from now (like 50 or more years). Telepresence is the best we are going to be able to do in the near future, which is fine by me. I like being inside the earth's magnetic bubble. It's cozy.
make so many people lose their grip on reality? Whether it is thinking we all live in a computer simulation or UFOs are scouting the planet, or that the earth is really flat, there seems to be a connection between making too much money and losing your mind.
I agree that it is going to get even more ugly with the "feature set" as MS concludes that the audience is truly captive. They will boil the frog very slowly at first, and turn up the heat as time goes on. It will be interesting to see if any of the frogs ever complain.
Microsoft's behavior definitely could be construed as illegal, especially when they co-opted the red X (close) icon in the top right to instead agree to the EULA and begin the W10 installation, rather than closing the upgrade window. There has to be some law that says you can't misrepresent your EULA acceptance as a "close window" icon. I still don't understand why anyone wanted to trade in their purchased copy of Windows, that they had control over, for a shoddy service with ads that you can't control to nearly the same extent. It's beyond me, especially considering Windows 10's track record so far.
It is absurd to say this when you know many Windows users (Home version) cannot "wait". Stop making excuses for Microsoft's heavy handed, tin-eared, don't give a shit about customers attitude. There is no excuse for them taking all control away from users. If they did their jobs right, no one would even be talking about this, but they botch their updates virtually every time now. When you are batting zero, you should probably consider giving control back to customers so they can actually get work done on their computers without worrying about Microsoft crashing their computer with a compulsory update... that doesn't work. Sticking with Windows 7 Ultimate. No reason to downgrade to Windows 10, and lots of reasons not to.
Our political system is, like most, set up to protect the rights of our ruling class. The working class, by and large, has little or no say in such matters.
In case someone is about to say they need a citation for your claim, here it is.
People should stop showing their distaste for this rigged system by sitting out elections, and instead vote for the third party of their choice. Voting your conscience is a great way to voice your actual opinion, rather than going along with the two corporate owned parties. And if the other half of the country that don't vote each election actually voted, instead of giving up, it would change things.
The US really hates it when other countries do the exact same thing that the US does all over the world every day. I just wish more people in the US would tell their representatives to stop meddling with the rest of the world, whether it is carpet bombing Afghanistan, drone strikes in Pakistan, coups in the Ukraine, aiding rebels in Syria, destroying Libya, helping the Saudis bomb Yemen, or any of the other non-productive, highly destructive regime-change activities we are involved in every day. It is all about defense contractor profits and keeping the Middle East destabilized. Just expect lots more blowback as this all continues without your input or consent.
Helium cooling for liquid hydrogen fuel? Why does this sound so old school rocketry to me? My Estes solid fuel rockets sound more advanced, and I did that in the 1960s.
This is really the best SpaceX can do? I love rockets, I have loved space exploration since I was a kid back in the 60s, but I just don't see Elon Musk as the right way to stellar exploration. It seems like the oligarchy's means to the stars, not something for everyone like the Apollo program.
If we are going to put a national effort into going to Mars and beyond, it should be a fully public space exploration program. If Musk wants to chip in, that's great, but it should not be about him. It should be because he wants to make it happen, the right way.
The amount of anti-scientific drivel on/. has become quite strange. Humans have carefully recorded the extinction events they have caused over the centuries (e.g., Steller's sea cow, the dodo, Tasmanian tiger, passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, etc. etc. etc.).
I have to assume that lots of the anti-science types are just yanking everyone's chains for fun. It would be very disturbing to find out they actually believe the crap they type here.
Slashdot Mirror
I said in several of my posts I was not talking about insanity. Now I know you are not reading what I wrote. You are assuming what I wrote. I am not talking about being insane or having a mental illness. I was saying that having too much money affects people's thinking and behavior in negative ways. I wanted you to provide citations that purport that having huge sums of money does not affect people's reasoning, empathy, risk taking, etc. My original question was why do many really rich people seem to lose touch with reality and start saying and believing absurd things.
You can make your points without reference to me personally, and you know it. Yes, you did start with sarcasm and I accept your apology. I was not trying to be condescending, and I don't think I was. The topic I brought up was why do so many rich people seem to have trouble with reality. I fully understand that many regular (non-wealthy) people have a very poor grip on reality. But you would think that highly successful people with more money than God might be more rational. My contention, and you have provided no evidence to the contrary, is that they often seem to have less of a grip on reality than average people. Take a look at the book 'Dark Money" by Jane Mayer about the Koch family. Clearly, the money had a big effect on their view of the world and their thinking capabilities.
And believe me, your description of how the brain works is not from any neuroscientists that I have read. In fact, there is no single theory of how the brain functions from a single source. You need to read many, many papers from many sources to even come to a vague notion of how the brain functions. I would be happy to have a fuller discussion with you on that if you are interested. For example, what is your take on the so-called default mode of brain activity and the circuits involved? I would be very interested to hear your opinions on it.
Citations please?
I am a neuroscientist by trade and your description of the brain functioning is not particularly accurate nor helpful for the discussion. I was talking about the growing body of scientific literature that shows that money has negative effects on human cognition, everything from risk assessment and risk taking, to empathy toward others. I also maintain that it allows people to live in a fact free bubble even more easily than it is for people of modest means to be fact free. What I don't understand is why you need to keep bringing me into the discussion. Clearly you can't just discuss something without showing your irritation with others who disagree.
Finally! On topic and useful input. The lack of reality checks is probably key. Rich people are surrounded by yes men and women, and don't get challenged like most people do on a regular basis. Even some people here at /. don't want anything bad said about rich people. So between the lack of being challenged on stupid or crazy ideas, along with the narcissism and egos, you have a recipe for delusional or irrational thinking. I don't think they are crazy, I think their thinking abilities have been skewed by too much money, too much power, too little honest input from those around them and too much free time. Like Musk's hyperloop. It just isn't practical for sending people from one place to another, just to get their a little faster. What is so horrible about sitting on a high speed train for 2 or 3 hours.
You and the others have provided no proof for your statements. I already gave links, and could give many more that show that money affects people's thinking, their behavior towards others, their empathy and their decision making. These effects are well documented. You and the others only comment was that I had selection bias. You will never win a debate with that approach. You certainly haven't won this debate. So instead of talking about me, how about you talk about the effects or lack thereof of money on people's behavior and reasoning? Nah, you ain't got nothing. Prove me wrong and show me all those citations you have lined up that indicate that money does not have any deleterious effects on people's brains or behavior.
Again, ad hominem. Not one word about the topic. You clearly have nothing of substance to say. But that is not surprising. Can't wait for your next, off topic ad hominem.
The best options for now in my opinion are for people to stay in Earth orbit most of the time, and enjoy the nice magnetic bubble shield. Robots with telepresence can do the work further out until scientists and engineers get a handle on being in interplanetary space for long periods. For very long distance travel they really will need the spinning ring around a central core to provide artificial gravity, and that is going to make a big ship. Without the gravity people will lose bone and muscle mass even with various exercise regimes. We evolved with gravity as an essential aspect of life, and you really can't live properly without it. So for long distances and long flight times we need artificial gravity and full shielding in at least the parts of the ship where people spend their time. Dosimeters of some type will probably be useful.
Citations please. The research I have read indicates that lots of money makes people less empathic, less social and more irrational. And I was not talking about mental illness as you know, I was talking about delusional thinking. But go ahead and defend wealthy people without offering any information or citations.
And considering how much information is out there about how money affects people's behavior and rationality, I think my case is strong.
http://www.livescience.com/112...
https://www.researchgate.net/p...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
http://nymag.com/news/features...
Well, considering how many stories there have been about rich people showing signs of delusion, I am sticking with my point. You can't say I have selection bias based on no information whatsoever. That is off topic completely and you know it. Now Musk and Bezos say they are going to have a personal race to Mars. Again, it sounds delusional to me. Oh, sorry, that must just be selection bias. There is a strong tendency among some posters at /. to complain about the commenter, and bring up selection bias or the Dunning Kruger effect rather that sticking to the point of the discussion. I know it makes some people feel superior to say such things, but it is just a soft form of ad hominem, and it shows you have nothing to say about the actual discussion..
So maybe a double jacket would work. I am not an engineer, I am a neuroscientist, so I worry about the brain, and protecting that. I would never go to Mars myself unless there was full shielding against all significant radiation damage. I understand there are lots of people who wouldn't care because they think they can take it and survive, but the increased cancer risk and potential for brain damage should worry everyone.
You stated nothing, you offered no information. You just claimed I was biased. How is that intelligent or meaningful? Please, at least pretend you have something meaningful to say.
I thought boron was one of the best neutron absorbing materials.
No, that would be you.
Face it, until they figure out how to fully shield the spacecraft, this is not practical for humans. It will probably require actual physical shielding if you really want to stop all harmful exposure. That means lots of heavy metal, which is not good for spacecraft getting into orbit. So it would have to be built in orbit. That means we are talking a long time from now (like 50 or more years). Telepresence is the best we are going to be able to do in the near future, which is fine by me. I like being inside the earth's magnetic bubble. It's cozy.
make so many people lose their grip on reality? Whether it is thinking we all live in a computer simulation or UFOs are scouting the planet, or that the earth is really flat, there seems to be a connection between making too much money and losing your mind.
Proprietary machines and software have no place in a Democracy (or a Democratic Republic). But they have very important roles in a plutocracy.
I agree that it is going to get even more ugly with the "feature set" as MS concludes that the audience is truly captive. They will boil the frog very slowly at first, and turn up the heat as time goes on. It will be interesting to see if any of the frogs ever complain.
Microsoft's behavior definitely could be construed as illegal, especially when they co-opted the red X (close) icon in the top right to instead agree to the EULA and begin the W10 installation, rather than closing the upgrade window. There has to be some law that says you can't misrepresent your EULA acceptance as a "close window" icon. I still don't understand why anyone wanted to trade in their purchased copy of Windows, that they had control over, for a shoddy service with ads that you can't control to nearly the same extent. It's beyond me, especially considering Windows 10's track record so far.
It is absurd to say this when you know many Windows users (Home version) cannot "wait". Stop making excuses for Microsoft's heavy handed, tin-eared, don't give a shit about customers attitude. There is no excuse for them taking all control away from users. If they did their jobs right, no one would even be talking about this, but they botch their updates virtually every time now. When you are batting zero, you should probably consider giving control back to customers so they can actually get work done on their computers without worrying about Microsoft crashing their computer with a compulsory update... that doesn't work. Sticking with Windows 7 Ultimate. No reason to downgrade to Windows 10, and lots of reasons not to.
Our political system is, like most, set up to protect the rights of our ruling class. The working class, by and large, has little or no say in such matters .
In case someone is about to say they need a citation for your claim, here it is.
https://scholar.princeton.edu/...
People should stop showing their distaste for this rigged system by sitting out elections, and instead vote for the third party of their choice. Voting your conscience is a great way to voice your actual opinion, rather than going along with the two corporate owned parties. And if the other half of the country that don't vote each election actually voted, instead of giving up, it would change things.
The US really hates it when other countries do the exact same thing that the US does all over the world every day. I just wish more people in the US would tell their representatives to stop meddling with the rest of the world, whether it is carpet bombing Afghanistan, drone strikes in Pakistan, coups in the Ukraine, aiding rebels in Syria, destroying Libya, helping the Saudis bomb Yemen, or any of the other non-productive, highly destructive regime-change activities we are involved in every day. It is all about defense contractor profits and keeping the Middle East destabilized. Just expect lots more blowback as this all continues without your input or consent.
Helium cooling for liquid hydrogen fuel? Why does this sound so old school rocketry to me? My Estes solid fuel rockets sound more advanced, and I did that in the 1960s.
This is really the best SpaceX can do? I love rockets, I have loved space exploration since I was a kid back in the 60s, but I just don't see Elon Musk as the right way to stellar exploration. It seems like the oligarchy's means to the stars, not something for everyone like the Apollo program.
If we are going to put a national effort into going to Mars and beyond, it should be a fully public space exploration program. If Musk wants to chip in, that's great, but it should not be about him. It should be because he wants to make it happen, the right way.
The amount of anti-scientific drivel on /. has become quite strange. Humans have carefully recorded the extinction events they have caused over the centuries (e.g., Steller's sea cow, the dodo, Tasmanian tiger, passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, etc. etc. etc.).
http://www.biologicaldiversity...
http://science.sciencemag.org/...
http://advances.sciencemag.org...
We have been doing it for tens of thousands of years...
http://science.sciencemag.org/...
http://science.sciencemag.org/...
I have to assume that lots of the anti-science types are just yanking everyone's chains for fun. It would be very disturbing to find out they actually believe the crap they type here.