There is only one way to exit a fight with a woman - by accepting your fault and apologizing, regardless of who really is guilty (if there is anyone, and if there is anything to fight over - neither of that is guaranteed.)
Privet! That's an idea, but I must say that it doesn't always work. A lot of disagreements arose in my previous relationship, as I was reading your message I felt I was reading about myself:-)
I took the "my fault, I apologize" path when I began to notice that we had disagreements in which logic didn't help me, their frequency got waaaay above the threshold and I knew something had to be done. I was afraid that eventually I will be seen as a weak person with no ability to support their point of view. This turned out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. While I retained my ability to get a message across while arguing with other people, I was "powerless" in front of her. Maybe she got used to the fact that I give in eventually?
In these circumstances, it is reasonable for her to ask the question "Why should I be with someone who is always wrong?". You friend was right, I got used to it and it never felt like doing her a favour. Whether she felt she was doing me a favour every time she said "I forgive you", that's an entirely different question.
You can break your head writing poems and delving into "post-mortem debug" sessions:-), I think one must be prepared to conclude that the typical approach is not effective in such cases. http://xkcd.com/55/
Thank you for the feedback, I'll definitely find more details about Gottman's work.
Let me share my findings now. There is a book called "The brain, a decoded enigma"; the author provides a model that attempts to describe the modus operandi of the brain. It is an interesting read, there are a lot of great ideas in it; and besides that, the book is available for free.
One of the things we can understand after reading this book is "what is love?". Here is an excerpt, "Love, to love"
The main model of any brain (human or animal) is the Protection and Survival Model (PSM). If something (a person, an animal, an object, an idea...) is included by a person in his/her PSM (as a model, of course), the relation between that "something" and that person is a love relation. That is, e.g. a person A includes a person B (as model) in his/her PSM. The person A will treat person B in the same way as he/she treats his/her legs, hands, eyes etc.
Here we use the convention that A indicates the person who is in love and B is the person included in the PSM as a model.
The most important love-relation seems to be between a mother and her children.
As we defined the term "love" the fact that A loves B is totally independent on the fact that B loves A.
We already described love based on PSM. There is another type of love, which is not based on PSM. Thus, the person A makes a structure of models which contains B in about all of them. If B disappears, the models would become obsolete, which produces a large instability of the structure. The problem could be solved by another "B" or by a shielding model or by suicide.
Because love is based mainly on image models, about all of the written above is true for animals too.
Of course, you'll have to read the entire work in order to understand some of the terms. Overall I think that the book is a pretty good model of reality, so far I've been able to confirm its predictions on multiple occasions.
I have written some essays on the subject myself, they describe various aspects of a relationship:
Do you think it would make a difference if some of your peers were more like you?
I can tell similar stories about myself; but (I think) the difference is that I was brought up to be quite independent (my early childhood years were dominated by interactions with adults, not interactions with kids) so I was less likely to let my thoughts be heavily influenced by "groups of my peers".
Further, if there are people like you around - it will be easier to resist peer pressure, because in this case it is easy to see that the things everyone says about "that one weird guy" are not necessarily true, because there are other "weird guys" too.
Perhaps improving one's social skills is a good solution to such problems?
Later, when I went to a university, I noticed that in the beginning I wasn't very "popular" (in fact, multiple people confessed later that originally they had "blacklisted" me by default, even though there was no reason for that because they didn't know me at all). Fortunately, by that time my independence enabled me to get past that easily, I could just as well exist as a "one man - one team" element; but with said social skills, new links were quickly established and that's how I met some of my best friends.
(i.e. people often "fall in love" with incompatible mates, which is illogical and perhaps should be labeled a mental illness?).
This statement has captured my attention, I'd like to ask you some things about it.
Can you tell me your definition of "fall in love" and "incompatible mates"? I'm genuinely interested, perhaps you can provide some references to materials that try to formalize this? Or elaborate on your point of view?
There probably was a process with an open handle for the deleted file. It would not be seen on the file system, but the OS itself would keep it for as long as someone uses it.
As soon as you close that handle, the resource is really freed.
This explains the delta between the output of df and the sum of sizes of the files in the file system.
Google (unwittingly) provides tool, which simplifies the practice of ostracism of burakumin by reviving the old ghettos maps on modern maps.
It is probably another instance of the "guns don't kill people, people do" problem. In these terms, it is indeed Google's fault.
This is an example of a "technical fix" - trying to solve a problem technologically, when the essence of the problem is in humans (and it can only be fixed by influencing humans themselves).
This doesn't help, because in my case (and probably that of many other people) you only think about moving tabs out from one window to another when too many are open already.
What is needed is an easy way to move tabs between windows, this will mitigate the problem, but it won't remove its root.
I agree with the original poster, the "live bookmarks" concept is something that has to be implemented. I described a similar mechanism in the following article, I call them global bookmarks.
In the same context, you might want to read another article that deals with tab bloat in browsers.
Here's what I wish to tell you in this discussion. I graduated several years ago and my plan was to continue the studies without pauses. However, the planets aligned in such a way that I decided to stay where I was - a company where I started working when I was half-way on my path towards the BSc in Computer Science.
It has been almost three years since then, and throughout this time I felt that I still wanted to study something. "Hunger for knowledge"? Maybe, but I've been exercising my brain all this time - reading books, researching various fields, writing essays, helping people - I learned many things but I still wasn't satisfied.
Recently I was contacted by one of my university professors and asked whether I was interested in a teaching position. I thought that was a great idea because it would bring me back into the academic environment. I expected this to have a positive effect on me and somehow supress this "need for more".
It did, I enjoy the process very much, I get along with the students... but I still have the feeling that I want to learn more, that there are several fields in which I am not yet sufficiently advanced, etc.
I must also point out that in the meantime I became the CEO of my company.
Today I don't regret not taking an MSc course back a few years, but I am considering getting one in the near future. In the years since graduation I sharpened my skills, I got a better idea of what I want to do next, and I became a more mature person.
Immediately after graduation I was thinking about an MSc because "it's the next item in the list, everyone does it and MSc is better than no MSc". Today I know exactly why I want it - improve myself in order to be able to do better, plus I have a list of features which need to be improved.
I make more than I actually need, and I believe that many other people would choose to change nothing if they were in my shoes; but the thought of continuing my studies never leaves me.
If you are like me, then consider not getting an MSc right away, but spend some time working in the field. After a couple of years think about the problem again and figure out whether an MSc is what you need or not.
Yes, it looks good on paper and the numbers are on your side. But from the individual's perspective [at least in the pre 9/11-period] it appears to be a "very likely to die vs likely to survive" problem.
You never know how many of them are there at all (if you take one guy down, is that it? Or will you have to face 10 people who are angry because their buddy got killed?). In such cases actions have to be well-synchronized for the hostages to succeed - can you count on other people's support? Will they be able to dynamically adjust their strategy if something doesn't go by the plan and there is no time to review things?
Since you lack such information, you can't be sure whether it is:
[a] "very likely to die vs likely to survive" or [b] "very likely to die vs certain death"
This is what makes people choose not to resist (unless they're Steven Seagal or Chuck Norris).
Of course, if you have some skills in the field and you're not the "average citizen", you can get some important details by looking at the weapon model and remembering how many bullets it can hold; you can notice whether the attacker holds the weapon right (and predict how long it will take him to trigger the safety in order to shoot); you can think about how long it takes until the weapon can fire again; you can think about the power of the recoil and estimate how easy it will be for you to knock them off. BUT - an average citizen is not likely to be able to do such decision-making. From their point of view the weapon has a hell of a lot of bullets, it can fire them rather quickly and precisely, etc.
Firstly, Java can actually do some runtime optimizations that (for example) C can't. There are even circumstances where a garbage collector is faster than manual malloc/free. So purely from a performance aspect, it's not quite as clean as you think.
Can you provide more details? Doesn't the garbage collector rely on malloc/free internally?
If yes, what can it do better than code in which memory processing routines are used properly?
(I assume you are talking about efficiency of code execution, not cost of maintainance or how easy it is to understand the code).
Do you think the problem would occur if those lands weren't forcefully populated with non-natives in the first place?
I don't know if you've ever been to Moldova, but the Russians here live an easy and safe life, like everybody else. There is no discrimination, nobody kicks nobody's butt in the street for the fact that they are "!moldovan", etc.
I've never been to Georgia, but if they are like us, I think that "prevent ethnical cleansing" is just a pretext to keep troops there.
You can't speak for everyone else. I'm from Moldova and I can tell you that there are a lot of people here who are still able to reason clearly.
The people want it, but the leaders find it against their "business interests". It is not _us_ who came up with the stupid Moldovan-Romanian dictionary, it is not _us_ who told the Romanian government to "keep out of our internal matters", it is not _us_ who don't even speak Romanian nor bother to learn it.
What happens now is that the people are trying to get rid of these incompetent leaders.
I am ashamed every time I watch the news and see how our politicians refuse to cooperate with the Romanian government - which has tried numerous times to offer us a hand of help.
In this context it is evident why there are people in Romania who don't see Moldovans as "brothers" anymore.
There are several ways in which they could cheat, doing this before or after the elections.
An observer can only see the same person walk in and out into _the same_ office to vote several times, or see a person using several voting ballots.
What an observat can't see: - the same person voting in different voting offices - how people were prevented from entering the country in the pre-election period - how voting offices were not set-up in some parts of the country - how someone shows up and uses the identity of a dead person using fake documents
The opposition promised they will bring evidence that proves that the elections were tricked. If that is true, then we have a case.
I myself am against violence and I hope no one will die in the riots; I realize that the crowd can be easily manipulated.
Stalin said it a long time ago - it doesn't matter how people vote, it only matters who does the counting.
On the other hand, I do agree that those with Romanian heritage in Moldavia do not amount to more than 50-60%, so I can understand than many would prefer stronger ties with Russia instead.
This is because the Soviets took this into account and deported great numbers of people to Siberia; at the same time they "imported" a lot of Russians and offered them a place to live, the best-paying jobs, encouraged the use of the Russian language and discouraged the use of Romanian, etc.
I think he is right, but my rationale is slightly different - speaking several languages enables you to represent information in multiple ways, then you can choose which of these representations is easier to memorize (or to understand, or to explain to someone else, etc).
In this essay on memorizing things I explain which strategies can be used to make us remember things better; using multiple languages is one of the proposed methods.
I speak three languages fluently and I saw that this gives me an advantage. I did many experiments with various forms of writing and in the end I noticed that my lecture notes were almost always shorter than my colleagues', but they contained more useful information. By "shorter" I don't mean "1 page instead of 3, because my writing is very small", I mean "less words but a lot of content".
It is not caused by the fact that I switch from one language to another while writing, but by the fact that I think about the information in different ways before writing it down.
I'd like to second Max's idea. There are a lot of systems that cannot be used efficiently because the users "don't get it". Most of the "they don't get it" issues can be mitigated with an improved UI.
I conclude this everytime I watch my parents do something on a computer; one uses Windows, the other - Linux (Gnome) - but the patterns are the same. We need a change in paradigm, a quantity->quality leap.
I think they mean that video-games help you to get better results from what you see using some "software algorithms" (i.e. using interpolation or extrapolation, the brain can make more accurate predictions about something).
The problem is that while the brain can compensate "bad input" with software post-processing, it cannot outperform another human, who has perfect vision (thus their eyes generate "good input" for the brain - so there is no need for post-processing).
Slashdot Mirror
I often deal with Romanian and Russian translations - both these languages have an equivalent for 'default'.
See the suggestion of another poster, find an equivalent expression, such as "factory settings".
Privet! That's an idea, but I must say that it doesn't always work. A lot of disagreements arose in my previous relationship, as I was reading your message I felt I was reading about myself :-)
I took the "my fault, I apologize" path when I began to notice that we had disagreements in which logic didn't help me, their frequency got waaaay above the threshold and I knew something had to be done. I was afraid that eventually I will be seen as a weak person with no ability to support their point of view. This turned out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. While I retained my ability to get a message across while arguing with other people, I was "powerless" in front of her. Maybe she got used to the fact that I give in eventually?
In these circumstances, it is reasonable for her to ask the question "Why should I be with someone who is always wrong?". You friend was right, I got used to it and it never felt like doing her a favour. Whether she felt she was doing me a favour every time she said "I forgive you", that's an entirely different question.
You can break your head writing poems and delving into "post-mortem debug" sessions :-), I think one must be prepared to conclude that the typical approach is not effective in such cases. http://xkcd.com/55/
The right solution is to have the program convert the string to uppercase automatically. The program is not user friendly enough, as simple as that.
Thank you for the feedback, I'll definitely find more details about Gottman's work.
Let me share my findings now. There is a book called "The brain, a decoded enigma"; the author provides a model that attempts to describe the modus operandi of the brain. It is an interesting read, there are a lot of great ideas in it; and besides that, the book is available for free.
One of the things we can understand after reading this book is "what is love?". Here is an excerpt, "Love, to love"
Of course, you'll have to read the entire work in order to understand some of the terms. Overall I think that the book is a pretty good model of reality, so far I've been able to confirm its predictions on multiple occasions.
I have written some essays on the subject myself, they describe various aspects of a relationship:
Do you think it would make a difference if some of your peers were more like you?
I can tell similar stories about myself; but (I think) the difference is that I was brought up to be quite independent (my early childhood years were dominated by interactions with adults, not interactions with kids) so I was less likely to let my thoughts be heavily influenced by "groups of my peers".
Further, if there are people like you around - it will be easier to resist peer pressure, because in this case it is easy to see that the things everyone says about "that one weird guy" are not necessarily true, because there are other "weird guys" too.
Perhaps improving one's social skills is a good solution to such problems?
Later, when I went to a university, I noticed that in the beginning I wasn't very "popular" (in fact, multiple people confessed later that originally they had "blacklisted" me by default, even though there was no reason for that because they didn't know me at all). Fortunately, by that time my independence enabled me to get past that easily, I could just as well exist as a "one man - one team" element; but with said social skills, new links were quickly established and that's how I met some of my best friends.
This statement has captured my attention, I'd like to ask you some things about it.
Can you tell me your definition of "fall in love" and "incompatible mates"? I'm genuinely interested, perhaps you can provide some references to materials that try to formalize this? Or elaborate on your point of view?
There probably was a process with an open handle for the deleted file. It would not be seen on the file system, but the OS itself would keep it for as long as someone uses it.
As soon as you close that handle, the resource is really freed.
This explains the delta between the output of df and the sum of sizes of the files in the file system.
It is probably another instance of the "guns don't kill people, people do" problem. In these terms, it is indeed Google's fault.
This is an example of a "technical fix" - trying to solve a problem technologically, when the essence of the problem is in humans (and it can only be fixed by influencing humans themselves).
This doesn't help, because in my case (and probably that of many other people) you only think about moving tabs out from one window to another when too many are open already.
What is needed is an easy way to move tabs between windows, this will mitigate the problem, but it won't remove its root.
I agree with the original poster, the "live bookmarks" concept is something that has to be implemented. I described a similar mechanism in the following article, I call them global bookmarks.
In the same context, you might want to read another article that deals with tab bloat in browsers.
Same reaction, the ads were already blocked.
A-ha, I kid... I left them enabled because they never interfere with my activities on the site.
Here's what I wish to tell you in this discussion. I graduated several years ago and my plan was to continue the studies without pauses. However, the planets aligned in such a way that I decided to stay where I was - a company where I started working when I was half-way on my path towards the BSc in Computer Science.
It has been almost three years since then, and throughout this time I felt that I still wanted to study something. "Hunger for knowledge"? Maybe, but I've been exercising my brain all this time - reading books, researching various fields, writing essays, helping people - I learned many things but I still wasn't satisfied.
Recently I was contacted by one of my university professors and asked whether I was interested in a teaching position. I thought that was a great idea because it would bring me back into the academic environment. I expected this to have a positive effect on me and somehow supress this "need for more".
It did, I enjoy the process very much, I get along with the students... but I still have the feeling that I want to learn more, that there are several fields in which I am not yet sufficiently advanced, etc.
I must also point out that in the meantime I became the CEO of my company.
Today I don't regret not taking an MSc course back a few years, but I am considering getting one in the near future. In the years since graduation I sharpened my skills, I got a better idea of what I want to do next, and I became a more mature person.
Immediately after graduation I was thinking about an MSc because "it's the next item in the list, everyone does it and MSc is better than no MSc". Today I know exactly why I want it - improve myself in order to be able to do better, plus I have a list of features which need to be improved.
I make more than I actually need, and I believe that many other people would choose to change nothing if they were in my shoes; but the thought of continuing my studies never leaves me.
If you are like me, then consider not getting an MSc right away, but spend some time working in the field. After a couple of years think about the problem again and figure out whether an MSc is what you need or not.
Because you don't want to die?
Yes, it looks good on paper and the numbers are on your side. But from the individual's perspective [at least in the pre 9/11-period] it appears to be a "very likely to die vs likely to survive" problem.
You never know how many of them are there at all (if you take one guy down, is that it? Or will you have to face 10 people who are angry because their buddy got killed?). In such cases actions have to be well-synchronized for the hostages to succeed - can you count on other people's support? Will they be able to dynamically adjust their strategy if something doesn't go by the plan and there is no time to review things?
Since you lack such information, you can't be sure whether it is:
[a] "very likely to die vs likely to survive" or
[b] "very likely to die vs certain death"
This is what makes people choose not to resist (unless they're Steven Seagal or Chuck Norris).
Of course, if you have some skills in the field and you're not the "average citizen", you can get some important details by looking at the weapon model and remembering how many bullets it can hold; you can notice whether the attacker holds the weapon right (and predict how long it will take him to trigger the safety in order to shoot); you can think about how long it takes until the weapon can fire again; you can think about the power of the recoil and estimate how easy it will be for you to knock them off. BUT - an average citizen is not likely to be able to do such decision-making. From their point of view the weapon has a hell of a lot of bullets, it can fire them rather quickly and precisely, etc.
Thank you very much, I'll keep this in mind.
Can you provide more details? Doesn't the garbage collector rely on malloc/free internally?
If yes, what can it do better than code in which memory processing routines are used properly?
(I assume you are talking about efficiency of code execution, not cost of maintainance or how easy it is to understand the code).
Do you think the problem would occur if those lands weren't forcefully populated with non-natives in the first place?
I don't know if you've ever been to Moldova, but the Russians here live an easy and safe life, like everybody else. There is no discrimination, nobody kicks nobody's butt in the street for the fact that they are "!moldovan", etc.
I've never been to Georgia, but if they are like us, I think that "prevent ethnical cleansing" is just a pretext to keep troops there.
Actually things are not that bad, this event is uncommon and it doesn't fit into the pattern.
Let me know when you're here :-)
You can't speak for everyone else. I'm from Moldova and I can tell you that there are a lot of people here who are still able to reason clearly.
The people want it, but the leaders find it against their "business interests". It is not _us_ who came up with the stupid Moldovan-Romanian dictionary, it is not _us_ who told the Romanian government to "keep out of our internal matters", it is not _us_ who don't even speak Romanian nor bother to learn it.
What happens now is that the people are trying to get rid of these incompetent leaders.
I am ashamed every time I watch the news and see how our politicians refuse to cooperate with the Romanian government - which has tried numerous times to offer us a hand of help.
In this context it is evident why there are people in Romania who don't see Moldovans as "brothers" anymore.
There are several ways in which they could cheat, doing this before or after the elections.
An observer can only see the same person walk in and out into _the same_ office to vote several times, or see a person using several voting ballots.
What an observat can't see:
- the same person voting in different voting offices
- how people were prevented from entering the country in the pre-election period
- how voting offices were not set-up in some parts of the country
- how someone shows up and uses the identity of a dead person using fake documents
The opposition promised they will bring evidence that proves that the elections were tricked. If that is true, then we have a case.
I myself am against violence and I hope no one will die in the riots; I realize that the crowd can be easily manipulated.
Stalin said it a long time ago - it doesn't matter how people vote, it only matters who does the counting.
This is because the Soviets took this into account and deported great numbers of people to Siberia; at the same time they "imported" a lot of Russians and offered them a place to live, the best-paying jobs, encouraged the use of the Russian language and discouraged the use of Romanian, etc.
"Russian peacekeepers"....
Russia's presence in that area makes the problem persist. The reasons they're there is not to keep peace, but to maintain a conflict.
They need it because it is to their benefit to keep some troops here and there, "just in case".
Actually, there is a sign for the Russian ruble.
Yeah, I noticed that too: UpdateOnAFly(), dynamic_childs, InitParcer(), ...
I find it difficult to read such code because a part of me says "correct that error" while another part says "if it is not broken, don't fix it".
I think he is right, but my rationale is slightly different - speaking several languages enables you to represent information in multiple ways, then you can choose which of these representations is easier to memorize (or to understand, or to explain to someone else, etc).
In this essay on memorizing things I explain which strategies can be used to make us remember things better; using multiple languages is one of the proposed methods.
I speak three languages fluently and I saw that this gives me an advantage. I did many experiments with various forms of writing and in the end I noticed that my lecture notes were almost always shorter than my colleagues', but they contained more useful information. By "shorter" I don't mean "1 page instead of 3, because my writing is very small", I mean "less words but a lot of content".
It is not caused by the fact that I switch from one language to another while writing, but by the fact that I think about the information in different ways before writing it down.
I'd like to second Max's idea. There are a lot of systems that cannot be used efficiently because the users "don't get it". Most of the "they don't get it" issues can be mitigated with an improved UI.
I conclude this everytime I watch my parents do something on a computer; one uses Windows, the other - Linux (Gnome) - but the patterns are the same. We need a change in paradigm, a quantity->quality leap.
I think they mean that video-games help you to get better results from what you see using some "software algorithms" (i.e. using interpolation or extrapolation, the brain can make more accurate predictions about something).
The problem is that while the brain can compensate "bad input" with software post-processing, it cannot outperform another human, who has perfect vision (thus their eyes generate "good input" for the brain - so there is no need for post-processing).