I'm not sure they can do that. If they have an API for (mobile) apps to integrate friends streams and such, I doubt they could specifically interrupt this (unless they use the lawyers to do so. Then again, Google has been for opening data where fb has been for shutting it up, so the best thing would be to do the same, and integrate G+ into your fb stream (but that would be accepting them as equals).
This is exactly the reason why I'm so looking forward to the Bioware MMO. These people to me are the absolute masters of story-based RPGs, and to have every conversation option you take be irreversible seems like just what that genre needs. Let's hope they make it a great game.
This paper (in submission; written by a statistics expert) explains why this 'evidence' does not prove a success in precognition research, but instead demonstrates a problem in psychology statistical analyses: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1018886/Bem6.pdf
disclaimer: though I'm not on the paper I am affiliated with the author.
If you have a forum with an active community, you can have them do preselection of suggestions and comments, and organize votes among the members related to multiple potential improvements/updates/etc.
One game where I've seen this work very well is a card flash game (a la Magic the Gathering) called elements; users create their own card ideas, these are submitted to a voting process, and the game creator occasionally checks out a couple of winners and incorporates what he likes.
"We cannot allow a technological error to spook the markets and cause panic. This is unacceptable. In this day and age and with the use of such complex technology, we should be able to make sure that our financial markets are effectively monitored and investors are protected."
You know... the same thing could be said about banking practices. It's easy to whine about technological errors, but when we make the same point about economic errors spooking the market and causing panic, the bankers don't like it either..
Try being a scientist. That way, you're not just the guy working evenings and weekends, you're also the guy who keeps telling you that you need to. And it's a 38-hour salary of €28k... grr
Yes it's EEG. As the article says, the system detects where you focus (most likely by detecting effect of letters flickering at different points in time; point is: you can't do that with EMG). However, as long as you can move your eyes, this could easily be replaced (and done better) with an eyetracker.
The problem with this type of technology is that the group that will really benefit from it is very small. Sure, you can produce a few letters a minute, and that is a huge improvement for people with Locked- in syndromw (the final stage of ALS a.k.a. Lou Gehrig's disease). However, this technology often gets promoted to help quadriplegics and other people with severe but not total movement impairments. It does not really help them: the reliable information throughput of these systems is less than you could obtain with voluntary control of a few (facial) muscles.
If you can have accurate control of a 2D (or 3D) cursor in real time, that might be an achievement, but it looks like that will require invasive procedures. It may look impressive when people play pong with EEG, but it only requires gross 1-dimensional input.
see ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain%E2%80%93computer_interface ) for more on invasive and noninvasive Brain Computer Interfacing.
Yes. It's EEG. fMRI has also been used for Brain Computer Interfaces, but it's not really a good tool for it. It's a machine that fills a room, it takes 2 seconds to make a single scan of your brain, and it costs a few million bucks. EEG is simple, fast, and it can't really see past your skull.
The escapism argument makes sense, in a way. Being in prison is not just about removing a dangerous element from society, it is about taking someone's freedom as a punishment. If you're allowed entertainment that has you exploring vast worlds, you're actually halfway out of prison.
I think that the authors have confused an opinion related to natural selection with one related to evolution.
Natural selection relates to the inability of dead people to have children, which causes a close link between dying and not reproducing. It is one driving force of evolutionary change that does indeed have a decreased influence in societies with intense medical care. Sexual selection is another force (which I do not think can account for the Gnomification of womankind either), and a third relates to everything to do with fertility, breeding, and raising children. I believe this third factor may be related to the matter at hand.
For instance, it is easy to imagine that anorexic women have trouble breeding. More importantly, women who get pregnant a lot tend to weigh more as a result of their pregnancy; nothing genetic there (correlation != causation). and of course women who give birth young tend to have more children in their lifespan (or conversely, the women who will wind up having many children are the ones that tend to start early). That last factor is interesting, because the psychological urge to have children is very much influenced by genetics, and (because it is now the single most important determinant of the number of children you have) strongly subject to evolutionary change.
Additionally, we may expect the future to bring us women who are genetically insensitive to birth control medication, and who are allergic to letex (or aversive to condoms; I believe the last is a very rare example where men are an evolutionary step ahead of women).
The Hyena clitoris is actually a very good example of 'stupid design', that would make my list if I had to make one. However, most of this stuff just plain moronic.
That would suggest that my job in figuring out how the human brain works is not challenging enough, leading me to seek a tougher challenge in pen-and-paper rpgs and turn-based strategy games.
Also, it finally explains to me why all those stock boys and garbage pickup guys tend more towards games like go, chess, and civilization IV.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure they can do that. If they have an API for (mobile) apps to integrate friends streams and such, I doubt they could specifically interrupt this (unless they use the lawyers to do so. Then again, Google has been for opening data where fb has been for shutting it up, so the best thing would be to do the same, and integrate G+ into your fb stream (but that would be accepting them as equals).
This is exactly the reason why I'm so looking forward to the Bioware MMO. These people to me are the absolute masters of story-based RPGs, and to have every conversation option you take be irreversible seems like just what that genre needs. Let's hope they make it a great game.
Think of the lawyers! How will they make an honest living out of this?
This paper (in submission; written by a statistics expert) explains why this 'evidence' does not prove a success in precognition research, but instead demonstrates a problem in psychology statistical analyses: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1018886/Bem6.pdf disclaimer: though I'm not on the paper I am affiliated with the author.
That was my first thought when reading this, too.
If you have a forum with an active community, you can have them do preselection of suggestions and comments, and organize votes among the members related to multiple potential improvements/updates/etc. One game where I've seen this work very well is a card flash game (a la Magic the Gathering) called elements; users create their own card ideas, these are submitted to a voting process, and the game creator occasionally checks out a couple of winners and incorporates what he likes.
Am I the only one who only knows this quote (and many others) from Sid Meier's Civ?
Seriously, doesn't everyone on slashdot want this as well? I'm surprised it doesn't have the 'want' tag yet. =)
If you father children at age 8, you're not too bright either. =D (the same could be said for fathering 8 kids tho =/ )
I fail to understand why this article did not have the usual donotwant tag. =)
Since nuclei is a plural (think 'dollars' vs 'money'), shouldn't the article read 'number of nuclei' instead of 'amount of nuclei'?
"We cannot allow a technological error to spook the markets and cause panic. This is unacceptable. In this day and age and with the use of such complex technology, we should be able to make sure that our financial markets are effectively monitored and investors are protected." You know... the same thing could be said about banking practices. It's easy to whine about technological errors, but when we make the same point about economic errors spooking the market and causing panic, the bankers don't like it either..
Try being a scientist. That way, you're not just the guy working evenings and weekends, you're also the guy who keeps telling you that you need to. And it's a 38-hour salary of €28k... grr
"the particles measure less than 0.25 mm across"; so how the hell am I supposed to turn that into my epic sword?
Yes it's EEG. As the article says, the system detects where you focus (most likely by detecting effect of letters flickering at different points in time; point is: you can't do that with EMG). However, as long as you can move your eyes, this could easily be replaced (and done better) with an eyetracker.
The problem with this type of technology is that the group that will really benefit from it is very small. Sure, you can produce a few letters a minute, and that is a huge improvement for people with Locked- in syndromw (the final stage of ALS a.k.a. Lou Gehrig's disease). However, this technology often gets promoted to help quadriplegics and other people with severe but not total movement impairments. It does not really help them: the reliable information throughput of these systems is less than you could obtain with voluntary control of a few (facial) muscles. If you can have accurate control of a 2D (or 3D) cursor in real time, that might be an achievement, but it looks like that will require invasive procedures. It may look impressive when people play pong with EEG, but it only requires gross 1-dimensional input. see ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain%E2%80%93computer_interface ) for more on invasive and noninvasive Brain Computer Interfacing.
Yes. It's EEG. fMRI has also been used for Brain Computer Interfaces, but it's not really a good tool for it. It's a machine that fills a room, it takes 2 seconds to make a single scan of your brain, and it costs a few million bucks. EEG is simple, fast, and it can't really see past your skull.
I would advise to add that big red notice bar for IE8 users as well.
If everyone in the world would watch porn, there would be no more war...
The escapism argument makes sense, in a way. Being in prison is not just about removing a dangerous element from society, it is about taking someone's freedom as a punishment. If you're allowed entertainment that has you exploring vast worlds, you're actually halfway out of prison.
I had the same association. What an excellent book that was... =)
I think that the authors have confused an opinion related to natural selection with one related to evolution. Natural selection relates to the inability of dead people to have children, which causes a close link between dying and not reproducing. It is one driving force of evolutionary change that does indeed have a decreased influence in societies with intense medical care. Sexual selection is another force (which I do not think can account for the Gnomification of womankind either), and a third relates to everything to do with fertility, breeding, and raising children. I believe this third factor may be related to the matter at hand. For instance, it is easy to imagine that anorexic women have trouble breeding. More importantly, women who get pregnant a lot tend to weigh more as a result of their pregnancy; nothing genetic there (correlation != causation). and of course women who give birth young tend to have more children in their lifespan (or conversely, the women who will wind up having many children are the ones that tend to start early). That last factor is interesting, because the psychological urge to have children is very much influenced by genetics, and (because it is now the single most important determinant of the number of children you have) strongly subject to evolutionary change. Additionally, we may expect the future to bring us women who are genetically insensitive to birth control medication, and who are allergic to letex (or aversive to condoms; I believe the last is a very rare example where men are an evolutionary step ahead of women).
The Hyena clitoris is actually a very good example of 'stupid design', that would make my list if I had to make one. However, most of this stuff just plain moronic.
That would suggest that my job in figuring out how the human brain works is not challenging enough, leading me to seek a tougher challenge in pen-and-paper rpgs and turn-based strategy games. Also, it finally explains to me why all those stock boys and garbage pickup guys tend more towards games like go, chess, and civilization IV.
I was beginning to wonder whether they had a problem with butter