There is no such thing as information overload. All you have to do is narrow your search, or re-evaluate what you thought you were looking for. Because the tools are more powerful, they require more thought to use effectively. Not an astounding surprise there.
Suppose you're not looking for something narrow, but instead what a summary of the state of a debate on an issue, at a particular level of detail. The problem is that the strong points of each side of a debate are either (1), diffusely spread (over for example many Slashdot comments and many Slashdot stories), or (2), are presented as a summary that cannot simultaneously be both comprehensive and easy to digest (for those wanting a quick or simple introduction to the debate) and which does not provide an clear and easy way for opposite sides of the debate to have a point by point engagement (Wikipedia for example).
Features like comment moderation help, but information overload means that moderation only properly works for comments posted in the first few hours of a debate. Good points are often buried in noise.
What is needed is an online forum which provides both a permanent memory of the state of various debates, which is able to present the debate at multiple levels of detail, and which forces the various perspectives on the issue under debate to face off point by point so that weak and irrelevent points are exposed and forced out.
My attempt at this is makethecase.net. The main page needs some major prettification, but here is the "About" page, and here is my essay explaining why I think something like this is needed.
I was listening to the radio recently, due to my roomate liking "popular" music, and one song I heard over and over was some awful rap song where the chorus went 'SHAKE THAT LAFFY TAFFY! SHAKE THAT LAFFY TAFFY!".
Has this what Top 40 has come to?
Yes, that sort of music sells, and has always sold, because it's functional music. Party music.
Mediocre music that you can't dance to is fatuous. Only the "best" will sell.
Just the other day I tried to guide someone through setting up a new account and e-mail settings on XP SP2 over the phone. I decided to play it safe and told them to create a limited account. But when you log into the new account and try to run Outlook Express you get this error message, which I couldn't get them past to configure e-mail. I later worked out that you must first run Internet Explorer at least once on the new account before the e-mail setup wizard will come up when Outlook Express is run.
I'd further refine your definition of news as the unexpected things that
matter to your audience. As an example, politicians get too much space and time to spout predictable partisan spiels that are effectively devoid of information.
It's great that you and your editor do not regard reader feedback as a burden or simply an exhibit, but take it into account in determining your editorial agenda. But it seems there's still not much too and fro between reader and journalist. Would that be seen as a waste of journalist's time when they could be writing proper pieces? Perhaps you should put ads in the online forums to convince the bean counters that forum contributions are as much opinion writing as formally published pieces.
Ha! You're right, the site should be eating its own dog food and puting the case for its own existence in the case database.
But the way the site works would require either someone who disagrees with at least some of my points, or one who can play devil's advocate, to be appointed as editor of the con case in order that the points can be rebutted.
But I'll go ahead and convert the about section to case form.
The ability to post online comments on newspaper articles is becomming increasingly common, but there's no interactivity going on if the journalist does not participate in the debate. Unfortunately the current mode of operation of journalists and commentators is to write their piece and move straight on to something else. Rob did the same thing. He did not participate in the debate on his piece, though he did warn us with his ex-cathedra tag.
We need a system that allows for extended debate without the problems caused by information overload. My solution is here.
While adolescents everywhere form tribes, a more intense separation based on some hierarchy of popularity seems to be a uniquely American phenomenon. I certainly don't remember my school group as a set of labeled factions, whether waring or wary. And what was there certainly didn't carry over to either university or adult life.
The word "geek" has bad connotations. If you want a label, how about "specialist". The pitiful geek meme only propagates because of self-aggrandizing talk by those best at meme propogation -- those whose skills lie in talking and socializing rather than in system building.
Just as the once inexplicable, deity-assigned mysteries of the movement of heavenly bodies and the origin of complex life have been substantially explained, I don't think we should fall into believing that a explanation of the workings of the brain will forever be beyond us. There has been substantial and steady progress over the past twenty years — we know more about how the brain is structured and operates than you may think. I think we're close to pulling it all together. There's no reason to believe exotic physics will be part of the solution.
You may think it's a conceit to believe all this, but I think it's just as much a conceit to believe that human thinking is inexplicable.
Since there's a good chance brain behaviour doesn't depend on computations and timings much shorter than a milisecond, a simulation on a conventional parallel computer need not mimic the brain's layout of computation and communication, but can employ spatial and temporal multiplexing to achieve the same effect. This, coupled with that fact that an architecture with a small fast cache memory and a larger slower main memory is a good match for respectively holding neuron and synaptic states, makes me believe that current supercomputer architectures like Blue Gene would simulate a brain quite efficiently, given the right software.
In fact simulation of the cerebral cortex is one of the tasks Blue Gene will undertake
That's not my experience. Electronic form saves desk space, and allows easy searching, linking, and copy-pasting. I only wish I had a second monitor to avoid having to switch virtual desktops.
Because the thing you really want to do with a server is double- or triple-boot it. Yeah. Ph33r my sub 1-day uptimes.
Opterons will soon have on-chip support for virtualization, allowing all three OSs to run simultaneously -- a great advantage for applications like web/application/database servers.
Higher demand, same supply, equals higher prices. All fabs are nearly always maxed out because the high fixed costs make it desirable to make chips even if you can only sell them for peanuts.
And AMD did invest in a new fab, to begin production early next year, and has continued to invest in process tech, partnered with IBM. Some of these investments came later than AMD would have liked due to poor profitability over the last several years. Poor profitability was due in part to AMD missteps, but also, AMD is arguing, to illegal Intel tactics.
Why the prohibition on alcohol advertising? Is it a legacy of US puritan/prohibition-era thinking, or concern about the ads being seen by minors? In this regard I was amazed to read that US TV networks still refuse to air ads for spirits.
One thing about Google I don't like is the fact that it refuses to tell AdSense publishers what percentage of the click-through revenue they get. They just have to accept what ever Google deigns to throw them. I seen an opening for a competitor to promise a concrete share.
But seriously, I do think he has a point about his first two types, not properly covered by Gardener. Trivial intelligence -- the ability to store and regurgitate lots of information (savants are good at this). And Asethetic Intelligence brings up the point of whether there can be an objectively-determined aptitude in good taste.
The true measure of intelligence has always been, and can only be, the ability to operate a slide-rule while looking good in your thick glasses, lab coat and pocket protector!
Yes, people who can do that my friend are truly the elite.
Isn't these "types" of intelligence merely a dscription of intelligence?
I mean, we are asuming that the BRAIN controlls IQ etc, so by defining the different levels of awareness is not redefining intelligence.
They're different aspects of intelligence, some of which are not exercised by standard IQ tests.
The One I like best:wisdom of the body:
Yes, yes, I can see how, in a deep trans, my body will hand me the keys to Wisdom, late at night, and say in an ominous voice:
"Feed Me".
Yeah, well that's just your second brain in action. I think this type of intelligence is more to do with giving Michael Jordon some credit for not being a klutz.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no such thing as information overload. All you have to do is narrow your search, or re-evaluate what you thought you were looking for. Because the tools are more powerful, they require more thought to use effectively. Not an astounding surprise there.
Suppose you're not looking for something narrow, but instead what a summary of the state of a debate on an issue, at a particular level of detail. The problem is that the strong points of each side of a debate are either (1), diffusely spread (over for example many Slashdot comments and many Slashdot stories), or (2), are presented as a summary that cannot simultaneously be both comprehensive and easy to digest (for those wanting a quick or simple introduction to the debate) and which does not provide an clear and easy way for opposite sides of the debate to have a point by point engagement (Wikipedia for example).
Features like comment moderation help, but information overload means that moderation only properly works for comments posted in the first few hours of a debate. Good points are often buried in noise.
What is needed is an online forum which provides both a permanent memory of the state of various debates, which is able to present the debate at multiple levels of detail, and which forces the various perspectives on the issue under debate to face off point by point so that weak and irrelevent points are exposed and forced out.
My attempt at this is makethecase.net. The main page needs some major prettification, but here is the "About" page, and here is my essay explaining why I think something like this is needed.
Trance doesn't talk of sex. It's for people alone in E-Land. "Shake ya booty" may instead get some action going.
I was listening to the radio recently, due to my roomate liking "popular" music, and one song I heard over and over was some awful rap song where the chorus went 'SHAKE THAT LAFFY TAFFY! SHAKE THAT LAFFY TAFFY!".
Has this what Top 40 has come to?
Yes, that sort of music sells, and has always sold, because it's functional music. Party music.
Mediocre music that you can't dance to is fatuous. Only the "best" will sell.
Just the other day I tried to guide someone through setting up a new account and e-mail settings on XP SP2 over the phone. I decided to play it safe and told them to create a limited account. But when you log into the new account and try to run Outlook Express you get this error message, which I couldn't get them past to configure e-mail. I later worked out that you must first run Internet Explorer at least once on the new account before the e-mail setup wizard will come up when Outlook Express is run.
I've got no idea if it will be fixed in IE7.
I'd further refine your definition of news as the unexpected things that matter to your audience. As an example, politicians get too much space and time to spout predictable partisan spiels that are effectively devoid of information.
It's great that you and your editor do not regard reader feedback as a burden or simply an exhibit, but take it into account in determining your editorial agenda. But it seems there's still not much too and fro between reader and journalist. Would that be seen as a waste of journalist's time when they could be writing proper pieces? Perhaps you should put ads in the online forums to convince the bean counters that forum contributions are as much opinion writing as formally published pieces.
Ha! You're right, the site should be eating its own dog food and puting the case for its own existence in the case database.
But the way the site works would require either someone who disagrees with at least some of my points, or one who can play devil's advocate, to be appointed as editor of the con case in order that the points can be rebutted.
But I'll go ahead and convert the about section to case form.
Do you think the concept is worthwhile Pejorian?
The ability to post online comments on newspaper articles is becomming increasingly common, but there's no interactivity going on if the journalist does not participate in the debate. Unfortunately the current mode of operation of journalists and commentators is to write their piece and move straight on to something else. Rob did the same thing. He did not participate in the debate on his piece, though he did warn us with his ex-cathedra tag.
We need a system that allows for extended debate without the problems caused by information overload. My solution is here.
While adolescents everywhere form tribes, a more intense separation based on some hierarchy of popularity seems to be a uniquely American phenomenon. I certainly don't remember my school group as a set of labeled factions, whether waring or wary. And what was there certainly didn't carry over to either university or adult life.
The word "geek" has bad connotations. If you want a label, how about "specialist". The pitiful geek meme only propagates because of self-aggrandizing talk by those best at meme propogation -- those whose skills lie in talking and socializing rather than in system building.
No, current Opterons, Athlon 64s, Turions, and high-end Semprons have SSE3.
Just as the once inexplicable, deity-assigned mysteries of the movement of heavenly bodies and the origin of complex life have been substantially explained, I don't think we should fall into believing that a explanation of the workings of the brain will forever be beyond us. There has been substantial and steady progress over the past twenty years — we know more about how the brain is structured and operates than you may think. I think we're close to pulling it all together. There's no reason to believe exotic physics will be part of the solution.
You may think it's a conceit to believe all this, but I think it's just as much a conceit to believe that human thinking is inexplicable.
Since there's a good chance brain behaviour doesn't depend on computations and timings much shorter than a milisecond, a simulation on a conventional parallel computer need not mimic the brain's layout of computation and communication, but can employ spatial and temporal multiplexing to achieve the same effect. This, coupled with that fact that an architecture with a small fast cache memory and a larger slower main memory is a good match for respectively holding neuron and synaptic states, makes me believe that current supercomputer architectures like Blue Gene would simulate a brain quite efficiently, given the right software.
In fact simulation of the cerebral cortex is one of the tasks Blue Gene will undertake
Given the GP's toilet reference, I think the PP just accidently extruded an appropriate new word for this hybrid concept.
That's not my experience. Electronic form saves desk space, and allows easy searching, linking, and copy-pasting. I only wish I had a second monitor to avoid having to switch virtual desktops.
I think the US wants to revisit the moon soon to make sure the Chinese don't take all the good base spots.
Opterons will soon have on-chip support for virtualization, allowing all three OSs to run simultaneously -- a great advantage for applications like web/application/database servers.
OK, thanks for the info.
When you've got 300 million people it's easy to pull together a noisy lobby for just about anything, which can be a curse as well as a blessing.
Higher demand, same supply, equals higher prices. All fabs are nearly always maxed out because the high fixed costs make it desirable to make chips even if you can only sell them for peanuts.
And AMD did invest in a new fab, to begin production early next year, and has continued to invest in process tech, partnered with IBM. Some of these investments came later than AMD would have liked due to poor profitability over the last several years. Poor profitability was due in part to AMD missteps, but also, AMD is arguing, to illegal Intel tactics.
Why the prohibition on alcohol advertising? Is it a legacy of US puritan/prohibition-era thinking, or concern about the ads being seen by minors? In this regard I was amazed to read that US TV networks still refuse to air ads for spirits.
One thing about Google I don't like is the fact that it refuses to tell AdSense publishers what percentage of the click-through revenue they get. They just have to accept what ever Google deigns to throw them. I seen an opening for a competitor to promise a concrete share.
But seriously, I do think he has a point about his first two types, not properly covered by Gardener. Trivial intelligence -- the ability to store and regurgitate lots of information (savants are good at this). And Asethetic Intelligence brings up the point of whether there can be an objectively-determined aptitude in good taste.
There were seven originally. "Naturalistic" was added later (I don't see why it demanded its own type). The second link groups #6 & #7.
I agree the categories are somewhat arbitrary and overlapping, but I still think multiple types of intelligence is a useful concept.
Our society places a high value on Basketball Intelligence, so give it its due.
Yes, people who can do that my friend are truly the elite.
They're different aspects of intelligence, some of which are not exercised by standard IQ tests.
The One I like bestYeah, well that's just your second brain in action. I think this type of intelligence is more to do with giving Michael Jordon some credit for not being a klutz.