isn't that motivation? Getting paid LESS to do nothing, MORE to do something?
If you're a youth who has all the time in the world to attend a study then I don't think that the amount they were making made any real difference to them. It's no different than attending school or work: drug users or not, most people put in minimum effort to maximize the effort:profit ratio. If the additional profit for the task wasn't worth the effort, then there's no surprise they didn't go for it. The study is obviously not controlled for basic human behavior.
If anything, the study shows that non-users are more susceptible to carrot-on-a-stick schemes.
r=0.52
0.52 is a really really really really really really really really crappy statistical correlation coefficient. It's got to be at least 0.8 to mean anything.
In fact, most drugs, not just cannabis, seems to reduce this ability
Have you considered the effect of the social and legal stigma associated with the state's position on those substances? Really. Economic position is just as much, if not more, an effect of the state and not an effect inherent in any particular habit.
then "stoners" seems to have a long way to go
You're profiling stoners as those down and out people who are always having problems in life. 1) There are plenty of non-users who fit this social perception, 2) You don't see any good stoners because it's socially unacceptable to admit to using marijuana. Nearly 40% of people will admit in a closed study to using marijuana on a regular basis (at least once/month). I never admitted, even to a private study, to smoking cigarettes until I was 18.
It could really be America's most ridiculous secret.
In the present study, adolescents who smoked marijuana on a regular basis (near daily) were compared to a control group of adolescents on a two-option experimental task designed to measure motivation.
After smoking a few joints, I tend not to care about someone else's silly experiment either.
The marijuana using youth have obviously prioritized the research at its correct level: negligible.
To further quote the abstract:
initially produced greater rates of monetary reinforcement than an alternative option (non-work) that required no response output to earn money. Switching to the non-work option was interpreted as a measure of reduced motivation.
They're performing a study comparing how easily the youth are motivated by money. This has nothing to do with marijuana. The marijuana using youth obviously decided that getting paid for doing nothing was better than getting paid to do whatever the task was.
the marijuana-smoking participants switched earlier to the non-work option, and derived a greater percentage of their earnings from the non-work option
Everyone tends to think of themselves as the exception, that they are in control. In reality they are not, their judgment has diminished to the point, that they think they are actually better than before.
I think you can say this pretty much about anything. The person who needs their coffee because it helps them wake up, the person who needs their prozac because it helps them calm down, the kids who need their ADD medicine because it helps them concentrate.
I've estimated that at least half, if not 3/4, of the people driving on the road are under the influence of some substance or situation (sleep) which has an effect on their ability to make quick decisions and pay attention. There are plenty more dangerous activities--cell phone use, for example--which are far more distracting and dangerous than smoking a marijuana cigarette.
honestly can you say that getting stoned regularly doesn't cause a lot of people to put off making choices
I can honestly say that the decision making process becomes reprioritized. Many people try to make too many choices. In many ways smoking marijuana may help you decide what's really important. Some people spend their lives "drifting through life", as you put it, but that's probably what they always wanted to do anyway. Other people smoke marijuana and become enormously productive and creative.
"Drifting through life" is not a sure effect of prolonged regular marijuana use. Maybe it was for you because that's what you wanted to do. Maybe you don't want to do that anymore. That's you. That's not enough to justify law or the enormous campaign of pure and utter crap that's come out of the (taxpayer funded) government and several organziations of questionable scientific rigor.
There is no attention span reduction. They report an attention span reduction because their life sucks. It has nothing to do with marijuana.
Especially when I have known them since we were children and they used to have the same attention span as me
I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt and take them at their word. Really, though, there's nothing of substance here. How are you quantifying this?
I was just pointing out that you can develop addiction
That can happen with anything and everything. It's not related specifically to marijuana.
Ok it's cheap, but when you smoke 30+ joints a day... you do the math
Should we make gas illegal for people who drive 120+ miles/day? With recent price increases it's obviously creating an unstable financial condition for them. In a deregulated society they would figure it out. The habit would get cut back or they would learn to rebudget their money. People learn to set their own priorities in life. As long as those priorities are not directly harmful (for example, a habit of murdering people or shooting out windows) then the state has no business in it at all.
The only FUD being spread is the usual FUD that marijuana will make you stupid, or decrease your attention span, or turn you into a hippy. Marijuana doesn't do anything. The people themselves are who they are quite often with a good amount of assistance from the repressive policies of the state. You can say, for example, that marijuana users tend to have lower salaries than their non-using counterparts. Considering that a marijuana conviction pretty much destroys any chance at a professional career this is obviously a situation created by the state and not inherent to marijuana use.
until quantitative performance tests in controlled studies are done
I have a novel idea. How about we drop all the bullshit and political posturing and move directly to deregulation?
Nearly every single large medical study of marijuana has had its funding denied, or its license for the controlled substance denied, or any of dozens of other reasons to keep the study mummied in red tape. If people are working so hard to hide something then the most logical answer is probably the opposite. In this case: marijuana has little or no effect on anything, all negative social perceptions are due to years of wrongful regulation, all ill effects are circumstantial correlations, and the only reason for the continued illegality is the complete inability to admit that the government has ever made a mistake. PR and ego--no different than telling your manager he's wrong.
I smoked pot because I thought it was doing no damage to my brain. Had I known that it was doing permeanent damage
I don't believe you have any brain damage at all. Any hard times you're experiencing in your life are due entirely to your own decisions in life and are in no way due to a plant. Many poor aspects of life may be exacerbated by the state if you were caught smoking marijuana. Do not blame on marijuana what is purely an artificial situation constructed by ignorant politicians.
I have seen some friends of mine who started smoking... Now they suffer from very short attention span
Did you ever consider that perhaps their chosen path in life has anything to do with this, regardless of the marijuana usage? Some people are, just naturally, not going to make it very far in life. What they do or don't do in terms of drug usage makes little or no difference. That's like pointing to all the blue collar workers and saying,"See! They all live in the city and they're not CEOs! If they could just live in the country on big estates they could all be CEOs!" It just isn't so. If you grew up with underachievers or even achievers who had no financial backing to send them to college or put them in successful social situations then you'll always be surrounded by people who are down and out.
and sometimes go through very miserable times when they don't have immediate access to pot
Because it's a plant. There should be no shortage of supply. The shortage of supply is due, entirely, to the ignorance of people writing and enforcing silly prohibition laws.
Yes. Every day above ground is a good day and God does still love you. Every day with herb is better and there's no good reason why it isn't readily available. I hope you can see the natural cycle of frustration here which is completely independent of your anti-marijuana crusade.
So I say, do as you like with pot and everything else, but don't feel the need to justify yourself
You'll have a valid point when it's deregulated. As long as people can be stuffed into a jail cell for merely smoking marijuana the state is creating a need for justification.
And every good honest researcher was GPL compliant without knowing it because the GPL didn't exist yet. The concept of "fair and honest", no matter how it's embodied (call it GPL or good research policy), has always been and will always be the same.
Scientist B finds a copy on arXiv.org, puts his name in it, and illegitimately submits it to Nature. Scientist B is being completely unethical but well within his rights with respect to the GPL.
Scientist B is obviously publishing a derivative work and must provide the 'source code'. In the case of a scientific publication this can best be embodied by a reference. Everyone will see that Scientist B is obviously stealing the work of Scientist A and Scientist B will be run out of the industry.
Nothing prevents anyone from taking a work from a little known journal, polishing it up, running a few new tests, and submitting it to an esteemed journal. If they don't have the proper references in it someone may or may not notice their inequity. There is no license which can prevent this from happening.
The concept of "fair and honest way to do things" is present both in the GPL and in good scientific research.
Therefore, the GPL is a poor choice for scientific papers.
I've never thought so. Any good scientist knows that the work they've done is a derivative work of what someone else has done before them. GPL'ing our work is no different than including the citations for all the previously relevent work.
it's hard to see how anything like the GPL could be enforced
There is more to the GPL than enforcement. The GPL is also about finding out who wants to be fair and who doesn't. In a world without copyright law, if someone was violating the GPL, then good honest people who wanted to contribute to the betterment of the computing world would simply quit doing business with them. No big brother government or overpaid attorneys necessary.
You don't need laws for good to be good and bad to be bad. In all reality the laws are only contributing to the confusion.
the GPL is based in, and only works because of, copyright law.
Allow me to reiterate. In a world without copyright law, the GPL would be called,"The honest way of doing business." Haven't you ever been up front on honest with someone, contributed as a team player, without researching all of the binding laws ahead of time? If so, you've been GPL compliant without even knowing it.
Seeing the way the mod points are going, apparently I'm the only person whose life doesn't revolve around attorneys and politicians.
The GPL is based in, and only works because of, copyright law.
Oh bullshit. The GPL by any other name would still smell as sweet. In the absence of copyright law, we would call the GPL,"Just the normal honest way to do things."
Give up the diapers and graduate away from the dependency on copyright law.
Copyright law works perfectly well in the domain for which it was created.
Surely you jest. Copyright law is beholden to the courts. Court cases cost money. He with the most money wins. Not in every case, but in a precedent-setting majority of cases.
Copyright law sucks. It would be very easy to move scientific publications to the GPL.
What would you do with a GPL scientific paper -- change some things and put your own name on it?
Using psychoanalysis one determines that is the first thing that YOU thought of. That makes you the dick.
What would I do with a GPL paper? Probably nothing, maybe share it with some friends without worrying about the RIAA breathing down my neck. I was noting that all walks of life have GPL connections. Pity you had to go make a snide remark about it.
The concept is neat. I'm not about to wade through the math and double-check anything. It'd be nice if we could stick with general relativity without dark matter.
On a side note, they are distributing the source. It's possible they may even be GPL friendly.
I was actually asking for WiFi speakers around my local electronics stores about 6 months ago. I described to them a very simple system. Two boxes, each with standard audio jacks (1/8", 1/4", or RCA) with wireless broadcast between them. Radio Shack had a setup for $80 which included video. I didn't go for it.
I'm sure that if someone did do it the RIAA would be all over them for potential piracy uses.
This discussion is not about you congratulating yourself on your web searching skills.
This discussion is (has been, for the last hour) about: What do you call a steady-state pyramid scheme? I call it a pyramid scheme. What do you call it?
1) No longer speaking to the other guy who degenerated to a troll
Cross thread notoriety. I like that.
I am going to correct you yet again. A troll is someone who ignores facts and reality for the sole purpose of furthering an argument or harassing another party. That would be you.
Just couldn't get enough, even after you pronounced it "over", eh?
Coming from a person who quickly
You've been ignoring reality for over 3 hours in over 15 posts. I actually feel confident that there isn't a single other person on the planet who would continue to entertain you.
You should be thanking me for wasting my time on you. It's actually a compliment.
not to mention refuses to review even the simplist of evidence
For the last 4 posts, at least, the only piece of evidence necessary is to recognize that a steady state pyramid scheme is still a pyramid scheme.
If a steady state pyramid scheme is not a pyramid scheme, then what is it? If you can't say what you mean without redirecting to some outside post then you need to spend more time thinking about it.
Slashdot Mirror
If anything, the study shows that non-users are more susceptible to carrot-on-a-stick schemes.
0.52 is a really really really really really really really really crappy statistical correlation coefficient. It's got to be at least 0.8 to mean anything.
You're profiling stoners as those down and out people who are always having problems in life. 1) There are plenty of non-users who fit this social perception, 2) You don't see any good stoners because it's socially unacceptable to admit to using marijuana. Nearly 40% of people will admit in a closed study to using marijuana on a regular basis (at least once/month). I never admitted, even to a private study, to smoking cigarettes until I was 18.
It could really be America's most ridiculous secret.
Honeydip
The marijuana using youth have obviously prioritized the research at its correct level: negligible.
To further quote the abstract: They're performing a study comparing how easily the youth are motivated by money. This has nothing to do with marijuana. The marijuana using youth obviously decided that getting paid for doing nothing was better than getting paid to do whatever the task was.
My Lord! How does this crap get published???
I've estimated that at least half, if not 3/4, of the people driving on the road are under the influence of some substance or situation (sleep) which has an effect on their ability to make quick decisions and pay attention. There are plenty more dangerous activities--cell phone use, for example--which are far more distracting and dangerous than smoking a marijuana cigarette.
"Drifting through life" is not a sure effect of prolonged regular marijuana use. Maybe it was for you because that's what you wanted to do. Maybe you don't want to do that anymore. That's you. That's not enough to justify law or the enormous campaign of pure and utter crap that's come out of the (taxpayer funded) government and several organziations of questionable scientific rigor.
I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt and take them at their word. Really, though, there's nothing of substance here. How are you quantifying this?
That can happen with anything and everything. It's not related specifically to marijuana.
Should we make gas illegal for people who drive 120+ miles/day? With recent price increases it's obviously creating an unstable financial condition for them. In a deregulated society they would figure it out. The habit would get cut back or they would learn to rebudget their money. People learn to set their own priorities in life. As long as those priorities are not directly harmful (for example, a habit of murdering people or shooting out windows) then the state has no business in it at all.
The only FUD being spread is the usual FUD that marijuana will make you stupid, or decrease your attention span, or turn you into a hippy. Marijuana doesn't do anything. The people themselves are who they are quite often with a good amount of assistance from the repressive policies of the state. You can say, for example, that marijuana users tend to have lower salaries than their non-using counterparts. Considering that a marijuana conviction pretty much destroys any chance at a professional career this is obviously a situation created by the state and not inherent to marijuana use.
Nearly every single large medical study of marijuana has had its funding denied, or its license for the controlled substance denied, or any of dozens of other reasons to keep the study mummied in red tape. If people are working so hard to hide something then the most logical answer is probably the opposite. In this case: marijuana has little or no effect on anything, all negative social perceptions are due to years of wrongful regulation, all ill effects are circumstantial correlations, and the only reason for the continued illegality is the complete inability to admit that the government has ever made a mistake. PR and ego--no different than telling your manager he's wrong.
Because it's a plant. There should be no shortage of supply. The shortage of supply is due, entirely, to the ignorance of people writing and enforcing silly prohibition laws.
Yes. Every day above ground is a good day and God does still love you. Every day with herb is better and there's no good reason why it isn't readily available. I hope you can see the natural cycle of frustration here which is completely independent of your anti-marijuana crusade.
You'll have a valid point when it's deregulated. As long as people can be stuffed into a jail cell for merely smoking marijuana the state is creating a need for justification.
Scientist B is obviously publishing a derivative work and must provide the 'source code'. In the case of a scientific publication this can best be embodied by a reference. Everyone will see that Scientist B is obviously stealing the work of Scientist A and Scientist B will be run out of the industry.
Nothing prevents anyone from taking a work from a little known journal, polishing it up, running a few new tests, and submitting it to an esteemed journal. If they don't have the proper references in it someone may or may not notice their inequity. There is no license which can prevent this from happening.
The concept of "fair and honest way to do things" is present both in the GPL and in good scientific research.
You don't need laws for good to be good and bad to be bad. In all reality the laws are only contributing to the confusion.
Seeing the way the mod points are going, apparently I'm the only person whose life doesn't revolve around attorneys and politicians.
Give up the diapers and graduate away from the dependency on copyright law.
Copyright law sucks. It would be very easy to move scientific publications to the GPL.
What would I do with a GPL paper? Probably nothing, maybe share it with some friends without worrying about the RIAA breathing down my neck. I was noting that all walks of life have GPL connections. Pity you had to go make a snide remark about it.
The concept is neat. I'm not about to wade through the math and double-check anything. It'd be nice if we could stick with general relativity without dark matter.
On a side note, they are distributing the source. It's possible they may even be GPL friendly.
GPL friendly physicists rule.
I was actually asking for WiFi speakers around my local electronics stores about 6 months ago. I described to them a very simple system. Two boxes, each with standard audio jacks (1/8", 1/4", or RCA) with wireless broadcast between them. Radio Shack had a setup for $80 which included video. I didn't go for it.
I'm sure that if someone did do it the RIAA would be all over them for potential piracy uses.
Hm. If they're tcp/ip ready you could plug them into a wireless router. Since the wireless router is wireless it can be almost anywhere.
This discussion is (has been, for the last hour) about: What do you call a steady-state pyramid scheme? I call it a pyramid scheme. What do you call it?
I am going to correct you yet again. A troll is someone who ignores facts and reality for the sole purpose of furthering an argument or harassing another party. That would be you.
You've been ignoring reality for over 3 hours in over 15 posts. I actually feel confident that there isn't a single other person on the planet who would continue to entertain you.
You should be thanking me for wasting my time on you. It's actually a compliment.
For the last 4 posts, at least, the only piece of evidence necessary is to recognize that a steady state pyramid scheme is still a pyramid scheme.
If a steady state pyramid scheme is not a pyramid scheme, then what is it? If you can't say what you mean without redirecting to some outside post then you need to spend more time thinking about it.