That's literally the definition of a union, though.
I mean, more effective unions have mandatory membership, but a union itself is literally a group of employees in a field banding together to protecting their common interests.
It sort of us. It's not very revenue-rich, but there's a lot of value to your typical business in being able to officially publish things that help shape discussion. I wouldn't be surprised if most newspapers moved to operating at a (smallish) loss, owned by people from outside industries by the end of the decade.
How does he know he's correct is a fucking 20 page journal paper and bulky quantities of empirical data. Science has methodology to help test and validate hypotheses. It doesn't mean he's absolutely right about everything, but it is evidence the idea didn't come from nowhere.
Nah, journalists have mental shortcuts that help them get through stories, the same way us programmers have mental shortcuts that help us get through extremely complex code in a day that would take a novice a month worried over minutea.
I mean, it would be well beyond my knowledge level to actually describe those skills in any depth, and the best I could do is tell you what they teach at the beginning of intro to journalism courses, things like the 7 questions that get you your first two paragraphs or how to describe important figures to those readers unfamiliar with them.
That's not what I said at all. The causative mechanism ascribed by Dunning isn't the correlation that exists, but rather an underlying cause: that people who don't understand things lack the meta-cognitive tools to see their error. I think that theory is totally reasonable, and was only objecting to the notion that it has to be universal.
Here's the thing that everyone in academia from philosophy to arts to sciences believes that helps shape the reliability of academic study: an argument stands on its own, based on the reasonableness of the ideas and observations that feed into it.
People who are incompetent are going to arrive at several different wrong notions through several different flaws ways of approaching a problem. When arguments are well structured. those flaws can be pointed out, removed, improved on. Eventually, through the application of rigorous methods, you can arrive at a body of knowledge that is relatively competent.
Things like formal logic, the scientific method, experimental standards, these are all things that people can use to help in that process.
I know this is petulant and pedantic, but Dunning-Kruger is statistical, and only reflects the naturalness of a lack of detailed introspection.
More over, some people are genuinely competent at things. I want to object to the notion that it's an inescapable human failing, because Dunning and Kruger's research didn't show that. Just a strong overall trend.
Should we, really? That's not, in general, how our justice system is set up to solve problems*. I was raising the question because it's an incredibly important distinction.
*That this sometimes leads it to cause problems is a whole debate in and of itself.
1. Almost all serious websites are xhtml compliant. That's because being compliant is good for any bots crawling the site. 2. Do you imagine that all the HTML5 support that already exists came from nowhere? It was browser devs implementing the pre-reccomendations for HTML5 as a good idea. If the no one "gives a damn" about w3c, you'd find Chrome and Firefox behaving very differently with how they implemented next-gen UI elements. 3. Just use jquery or something, sheesh. No one needs to manually fiddle with DOM anymore.
Yeah, let's turn gitmo from a civil rights tragedy into a conspiracist boogeyman which you pretend is used for the elimination of the free press. It's a prison. It's a prison where horrible things have happened. It's a prison where horrible things have happened circumventing due process. But that's all. That's the end. That's bad enough, and you don't need to bake in conspiracy theories to make it worse.
Actually. Better theory. She was on a laptop, didn't have the touchpad disabled, and accidentally highlighted some text while typing. Poof gone, and happens to all over us.
Yes. "And as I was typing and working on questions for a Benghazi-related story, the data started wiping kind of at hyperspeed"
Not how someone with remote control over a computer would wipe data. Not deleting it in the fucking editor. A quick console deltree "My Documents/Bengazi" while the computer is idle is easier and less obvious to the user.
She almost certainly held down control and backspace by accident and blamed it on the government. Classic paranoid ideation.
No, sorry, you have to have a justifiable concern, even if questionable, to object to something. "It could be bad, maybe, we just don't know" isn't enough.
Yep, there's a sharp divide among us peoples on the left involved in environmentalism between those who see our environmental stability as crucial to human happiness and preserving natural beauty for future generations versus those who think "natural=good" "unnatural=bad". We put up with the latter group because a lot of times the goal is the same(save our national parks, keep our drinking water free of contaminants, limit global warming) and allies are necessary to win elections.
But we also have to repeatedly distance ourselves from the "no nuclear ever", "GMOs are evil", "herbal remedies are better" beliefs that can actually hurt the environment. And some of the biggest environmental concerns pragmatists(natural runoff pollution affecting river DO levels, water rights concerns, the occasional animal population control measure) have don't excite those groups, which sucks too.
You forgot your mandatory optional fearless medication, citizen. Please step into the nearest confession booth so that you can be happy. Only commie mutant traitors are afraid.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for that willful misunderstanding of a common phrase. I don't know where I'd be without your insight.
That's literally the definition of a union, though.
I mean, more effective unions have mandatory membership, but a union itself is literally a group of employees in a field banding together to protecting their common interests.
It sort of us. It's not very revenue-rich, but there's a lot of value to your typical business in being able to officially publish things that help shape discussion. I wouldn't be surprised if most newspapers moved to operating at a (smallish) loss, owned by people from outside industries by the end of the decade.
How does he know he's correct is a fucking 20 page journal paper and bulky quantities of empirical data. Science has methodology to help test and validate hypotheses. It doesn't mean he's absolutely right about everything, but it is evidence the idea didn't come from nowhere.
Nah, journalists have mental shortcuts that help them get through stories, the same way us programmers have mental shortcuts that help us get through extremely complex code in a day that would take a novice a month worried over minutea.
I mean, it would be well beyond my knowledge level to actually describe those skills in any depth, and the best I could do is tell you what they teach at the beginning of intro to journalism courses, things like the 7 questions that get you your first two paragraphs or how to describe important figures to those readers unfamiliar with them.
...
That's not what I said at all. The causative mechanism ascribed by Dunning isn't the correlation that exists, but rather an underlying cause: that people who don't understand things lack the meta-cognitive tools to see their error. I think that theory is totally reasonable, and was only objecting to the notion that it has to be universal.
I don't need total confidence to have a point. I know you're joking, but I don't post on slashdot hoping everyone comes and tells me I'm right.
I post and hope someone comes and tells me I'm wrong in a way that's interesting enough to show me something new.
Here's the thing that everyone in academia from philosophy to arts to sciences believes that helps shape the reliability of academic study: an argument stands on its own, based on the reasonableness of the ideas and observations that feed into it.
People who are incompetent are going to arrive at several different wrong notions through several different flaws ways of approaching a problem. When arguments are well structured. those flaws can be pointed out, removed, improved on. Eventually, through the application of rigorous methods, you can arrive at a body of knowledge that is relatively competent.
Things like formal logic, the scientific method, experimental standards, these are all things that people can use to help in that process.
I know this is petulant and pedantic, but Dunning-Kruger is statistical, and only reflects the naturalness of a lack of detailed introspection.
More over, some people are genuinely competent at things. I want to object to the notion that it's an inescapable human failing, because Dunning and Kruger's research didn't show that. Just a strong overall trend.
This cycle can go on forever, Mr. Mayor of borington.
Should we, really? That's not, in general, how our justice system is set up to solve problems*. I was raising the question because it's an incredibly important distinction.
*That this sometimes leads it to cause problems is a whole debate in and of itself.
Depends, is the goal disincentivizing scummy behavior or redeeming the company morally?
I've got opinions too. Like that your opinions about people sharing their opinions are dull.
Or maybe you could stop living in 2002.
I'm not sure slashdot counts as serious.
AND he will TAKE your ability to RANDOMLY capitalize words in POSTS, even though he has signed EXACTLY zero laws relating to GUNS in his entire TERM.
Well, there's a steaming pile of ignorance there.
1. Almost all serious websites are xhtml compliant. That's because being compliant is good for any bots crawling the site.
2. Do you imagine that all the HTML5 support that already exists came from nowhere? It was browser devs implementing the pre-reccomendations for HTML5 as a good idea. If the no one "gives a damn" about w3c, you'd find Chrome and Firefox behaving very differently with how they implemented next-gen UI elements.
3. Just use jquery or something, sheesh. No one needs to manually fiddle with DOM anymore.
Yeah, let's turn gitmo from a civil rights tragedy into a conspiracist boogeyman which you pretend is used for the elimination of the free press. It's a prison. It's a prison where horrible things have happened. It's a prison where horrible things have happened circumventing due process. But that's all. That's the end. That's bad enough, and you don't need to bake in conspiracy theories to make it worse.
No 14 year old gives that much of a shit. The symptoms she describes sound more like user error than someone "fucking with her".
Actually. Better theory. She was on a laptop, didn't have the touchpad disabled, and accidentally highlighted some text while typing. Poof gone, and happens to all over us.
Yes.
"And as I was typing and working on questions for a Benghazi-related story, the data started wiping kind of at hyperspeed"
Not how someone with remote control over a computer would wipe data. Not deleting it in the fucking editor. A quick console deltree "My Documents/Bengazi" while the computer is idle is easier and less obvious to the user.
She almost certainly held down control and backspace by accident and blamed it on the government. Classic paranoid ideation.
No, sorry, you have to have a justifiable concern, even if questionable, to object to something. "It could be bad, maybe, we just don't know" isn't enough.
You can but you don't. Chill.
Yep, there's a sharp divide among us peoples on the left involved in environmentalism between those who see our environmental stability as crucial to human happiness and preserving natural beauty for future generations versus those who think "natural=good" "unnatural=bad". We put up with the latter group because a lot of times the goal is the same(save our national parks, keep our drinking water free of contaminants, limit global warming) and allies are necessary to win elections.
But we also have to repeatedly distance ourselves from the "no nuclear ever", "GMOs are evil", "herbal remedies are better" beliefs that can actually hurt the environment. And some of the biggest environmental concerns pragmatists(natural runoff pollution affecting river DO levels, water rights concerns, the occasional animal population control measure) have don't excite those groups, which sucks too.
You forgot your mandatory optional fearless medication, citizen. Please step into the nearest confession booth so that you can be happy. Only commie mutant traitors are afraid.
The computer is your friend.