There's a difference between getting pleasure because someone succeeds and getting pleasure because I help him to succeed.
If you get pleasure from watching someone succeed, then you'll want others to succeed so you can experience the pleasure. Just because the pleasure is not from the ego boost of helping someone doesn't make it altruism. There was another study that showed that we get pleasure from seeing "bad guys get their just deserts for doing bad things", even if the bad things did not involve us in any way and we had no hand in dealing out the justice. Does that make it altruism? I think not.
What's even more, I can still help someone and then see him not succeed (theoretically getting no pleasure). Am I altruist only when the help I provide is successful in the end? No. If, as the article states, I get pleasure when someone succeeds, then there is altruism that doesn't lead to such pleasure (when it doesn't work).
Huh? When I bite into an apple, I expect it to taste good. If the apple turns out to be rotten on the inside, that didn't change the fact that the reason I bit into it was because I thought I'd enjoy it. Unless you're saying that you know in advance that you will not be able to help him succeed, but attempt it anyway? In that case you simply enjoy attempting to help. Or you think that an attempt to help will make the other person feel better, thereby making you feel better. Or you know you'll feel bad if you don't make the attempt.
Face it, babies try to calm their distraught companions. It doesn't seem to bring them much pleasure, but they still do it.
How do you know it doesn't bring them pleasure? What do you think is more pleasant - being next to a baby that's bawling it's eyes out or being next to one that's calm?
People are hardwired to do things they expect will make them feel good (or at least less bad.) People are either hardwired or conditioned to feel good when other people feel good. Put 2 and 2 together.
Which means that the area that tracks what is good for us, tracks what is good for others. You read it as a pleasure response happening when we act altruistically (ergo altruism is ultimately egotistical), but it actually says that it tracks what is good for others (for example, it may as well activate when we watch someone succeed).
Exactly, we get pleasure when we watch someone succeed, so it is in our interests that others succeed. What's so hard to get?
"The fact that we find pleasurable activity in those mandatory tax-like situations strongly suggests the existence of pure altruism," he said.
Seems here his definition of "pure altruism" covers a case where you get pleasure after being forced to sacrifice for someone else. I'd say that pure altruism would be sacrificing for someone else while knowing that it will not make you feel better, and that you will not feel any worse if you don't do it.
Face it, a "good" person is one that:
Feels good about doing good things
Feels bad about not doing good things
Feels bad about doing bad things
Feels good (or at least not bad) about not doing bad things
"Just once I would like to see a headline that said, "SCIENTISTS DISCOVER A CURE FOR HUMAN DIABETES," followed by details that say, "Scientists caution that this treatment in mice would give them inverted erections and make them hump themselves to death."" -- Scott Adams
Really? Where in the Old Testament does it say that Yahweh is infinite? "Though shalt have no other gods but me, for I am a jelous God" strikes me as a very finite being with insecurity issues who all but acknowledges the existence of other gods.
So looking at all the atrocities happening on our planet it is not difficult to believe in God? I would venture out to say, that it's the exact cause why it is so difficult for many to believe in God.
No, that only makes it more difficult to believe in the loving God of the New Testament. Nothing in current events could make a believer doubt the genocidal Old Testament God.
Yup, they'd try the game out, and then go to a game forum to complain about missing features and unusable interfaces when a quick skim through the manual could explain to them how to do what they want to.
The truth is, most kids just aren't going to spend several hours going to the library, finding the right book, and reading some 10-20 pages to find the relevant info when they belive they can find that same info via google in 10 minutes.
The truth is, most "digital age" adults are the same way too. If I want to learn something about a topic, first place I check is Wikipedia. If it's not there, then Google. If I'm learning a new (programming) language, then by all means I'll end up getting a reference book, but online tutorials come first.
Instead, he's killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis?
Now let's be fair, at most he's killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, and gave the rest the opportunity to kill each other (which many of them jumped on.)
no: something that manipulates biochemical pathways directly is addiction, something that works on reward pathways via psychological stimulus is habituation
I'm pretty sure that's the difference between a physical addiction and a psychological addiction. There are two umbrellas at work here, it's just that both are under a larger one. Kinda like jaywalking is an infraction (or misdemeanor), murder is a felony, and both are crimes. No one is saying that jaywalking is as bad as murder.
I also wonder if being a middle child has any effect on IQ...
Dunno about IQ (other than it being lower than firstborn's) but I recall a study showing that if you have an older and a younger brother you are more likely to be gay...
Not "cell phone" but "mobile phone", and we'll need to define the term since the question involves the future. In 20 years, there could easily be a gadget with power unmatched by today's desktops, connecting you to the internet wherever you go, instantly translating any foreign language you hear, etc etc. Anyone who doesn't have one will be the equivalent of today's Amish. With a million pounds maybe, but still....
What do you mean "Not for end user"? Every project that's meant to be used is geared towards an end user. If a business uses it, the business is an end user. If the developers use it, they are the end users.
Google Earth is a web app. What makes it so snappy is Ajax.
I've never actually used Google Earth, but I was under the impression that it does NOT run inside a web browser. So why would it use javascript? Maybe they meant to use Google Maps as an example?
That is unless it 'evaporates' first. It's only a matter of time until we do something stupid that really does cause a planet-wide chain reaction (or locks up the Earth Simulator we are running in...).
Ah, I see, so God's true name is the equivalent of a CTRL-ALT-DEL?
Slashdot Mirror
This has already been done, and quite well too.
How is disagreeing with the president not even worse treason?
That's a trick question. Disagreeing with the president is treason.
Ok, can I get my security clearance now?
There's a difference between getting pleasure because someone succeeds and getting pleasure because I help him to succeed.
If you get pleasure from watching someone succeed, then you'll want others to succeed so you can experience the pleasure. Just because the pleasure is not from the ego boost of helping someone doesn't make it altruism. There was another study that showed that we get pleasure from seeing "bad guys get their just deserts for doing bad things", even if the bad things did not involve us in any way and we had no hand in dealing out the justice. Does that make it altruism? I think not.
What's even more, I can still help someone and then see him not succeed (theoretically getting no pleasure). Am I altruist only when the help I provide is successful in the end? No. If, as the article states, I get pleasure when someone succeeds, then there is altruism that doesn't lead to such pleasure (when it doesn't work).
Huh? When I bite into an apple, I expect it to taste good. If the apple turns out to be rotten on the inside, that didn't change the fact that the reason I bit into it was because I thought I'd enjoy it. Unless you're saying that you know in advance that you will not be able to help him succeed, but attempt it anyway? In that case you simply enjoy attempting to help. Or you think that an attempt to help will make the other person feel better, thereby making you feel better. Or you know you'll feel bad if you don't make the attempt.
Face it, babies try to calm their distraught companions. It doesn't seem to bring them much pleasure, but they still do it.
How do you know it doesn't bring them pleasure? What do you think is more pleasant - being next to a baby that's bawling it's eyes out or being next to one that's calm?
People are hardwired to do things they expect will make them feel good (or at least less bad.) People are either hardwired or conditioned to feel good when other people feel good. Put 2 and 2 together.
Exactly, we get pleasure when we watch someone succeed, so it is in our interests that others succeed. What's so hard to get?
"The fact that we find pleasurable activity in those mandatory tax-like situations strongly suggests the existence of pure altruism," he said.
Seems here his definition of "pure altruism" covers a case where you get pleasure after being forced to sacrifice for someone else. I'd say that pure altruism would be sacrificing for someone else while knowing that it will not make you feel better, and that you will not feel any worse if you don't do it.
Face it, a "good" person is one that:
Of course "good" and "bad" are subjective....
"Just once I would like to see a headline that said, "SCIENTISTS DISCOVER A CURE FOR HUMAN DIABETES," followed by details that say, "Scientists caution that this treatment in mice would give them inverted erections and make them hump themselves to death."" -- Scott Adams
What, you mean you missed the news about us giving weapons to the insurgents provided they "promise to only use them on Al Quaeda"?
Why is it that all the good things happen to mice? I have to agree with Scott Adams' views on this one.
At the present time, the administration has defended torture
Silly poster, haven't you heard that it's not torture unless The President says it is? And he's not going to, so you lose.
The Yahoweh mythology is about an infinite being.
Really? Where in the Old Testament does it say that Yahweh is infinite? "Though shalt have no other gods but me, for I am a jelous God" strikes me as a very finite being with insecurity issues who all but acknowledges the existence of other gods.
So looking at all the atrocities happening on our planet it is not difficult to believe in God? I would venture out to say, that it's the exact cause why it is so difficult for many to believe in God.
No, that only makes it more difficult to believe in the loving God of the New Testament. Nothing in current events could make a believer doubt the genocidal Old Testament God.
Here we have science and God coexisting. Seems more likely than anything in the Bible to me...
Yup, they'd try the game out, and then go to a game forum to complain about missing features and unusable interfaces when a quick skim through the manual could explain to them how to do what they want to.
The truth is, most kids just aren't going to spend several hours going to the library, finding the right book, and reading some 10-20 pages to find the relevant info when they belive they can find that same info via google in 10 minutes.
The truth is, most "digital age" adults are the same way too. If I want to learn something about a topic, first place I check is Wikipedia. If it's not there, then Google. If I'm learning a new (programming) language, then by all means I'll end up getting a reference book, but online tutorials come first.
I was under the impression that that the universal "now" is an obsolete concept.
Instead, he's killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis?
Now let's be fair, at most he's killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, and gave the rest the opportunity to kill each other (which many of them jumped on.)
no: something that manipulates biochemical pathways directly is addiction, something that works on reward pathways via psychological stimulus is habituation
I'm pretty sure that's the difference between a physical addiction and a psychological addiction. There are two umbrellas at work here, it's just that both are under a larger one. Kinda like jaywalking is an infraction (or misdemeanor), murder is a felony, and both are crimes. No one is saying that jaywalking is as bad as murder.
Something in slashdot is getting rid of the underscore in the URL name. It should be
e ad.htmle ad-part-2.html
the_scrivener.blogspot.com/2007/06/copyright-is-d
the_scrivener.blogspot.com/2007/06/copyright-is-d
(seems it puts an extra space in 'dead' as well....)
You'd have to give up all your future mobile phones as well. If computers become really small and gain mobile phone functionality, you're screwed.
The best security is not having the damn wires there in the first place.
So, wireless then?
I also wonder if being a middle child has any effect on IQ...
Dunno about IQ (other than it being lower than firstborn's) but I recall a study showing that if you have an older and a younger brother you are more likely to be gay...
Not "cell phone" but "mobile phone", and we'll need to define the term since the question involves the future. In 20 years, there could easily be a gadget with power unmatched by today's desktops, connecting you to the internet wherever you go, instantly translating any foreign language you hear, etc etc. Anyone who doesn't have one will be the equivalent of today's Amish. With a million pounds maybe, but still....
What do you mean "Not for end user"? Every project that's meant to be used is geared towards an end user. If a business uses it, the business is an end user. If the developers use it, they are the end users.
From the article's explanation of Ajax:
Google Earth is a web app. What makes it so snappy is Ajax.
I've never actually used Google Earth, but I was under the impression that it does NOT run inside a web browser. So why would it use javascript? Maybe they meant to use Google Maps as an example?
That is unless it 'evaporates' first. It's only a matter of time until we do something stupid that really does cause a planet-wide chain reaction (or locks up the Earth Simulator we are running in...).
Ah, I see, so God's true name is the equivalent of a CTRL-ALT-DEL?
That sounds like suicide-bomber talk to me..... Have fun in Guantanamo!