Since the freezer wasn't insanely cold, the more likely cause is the roommate was taking vodka and adding back in water until the alcohol level got too low.
I only get drunk or not. I'm happy and a little sleepy.
The only think that made me feel a little different was Absinthe. It's an odd "wakeful drunkenness" without as much shimmer as I get from other alcohols.
But I have a client who is mean as hell on whisky but a happy kitten on tequila.
Logically, it should make *no* difference between those two.
Of course, but if managers and executives decide you *will* use this great new technology they heard of which will be different this time, then prove it works or doesn't before spending a million bucks.
So many technology decisions on large projects are driving by ignorant upper managements. The SAP decision was pushed down directly from the board of directors. It was obvious very quickly that the technology wouldn't work from the bottom but anyone who pointed that out was fired. No proof of concept was done and a lot of easy but still costly construction work was done first.
All I'm saying is, if you are going to build a new house- test the ground you are building on to make sure it can support the load. It is the first and most critical part of the project and the most likely to kill your schedule. Implementing an order entry pattern isn't going to blow your schedule or your budget.
Well, I certainly didn't live the '1%" rule. I must have been blessed. Every project over a million dollars in budget had at least one new language, tool, or practice that it depended on to work.
Staff would only be a risk if you are building dynamic teams for projects. If you have stable staff, you know their capabilities. New staff always has the risk that they lied about their capabilities.
The interesting and expensive failures always had high budgets and big executive interest.
The Adobe Flex project... where flex was new, relied on a lot of contractors.. and was end of lifed by surprise right as the project finished. The SAP project where they fired people who raised risks that cost over a billion dollars (and was a *complete* failure that was *completely* rolled back. The ecommerce site written in this new thing called "struts" was a success but it took two years of polishing the deliverable to get there. It eventually (in another 6 years) became very reliable and when they tried to dump it, so many customers were upset that they had to back down. The new mobile apps where the tools were changing and unstable during the project. Web services. S.o.a.p. And the list goes on.
A common theme was assuming new stuff would work under load without testing that before proceeding with coding. Then the project got momentum and kept going when it was clear the new technology would not work under load (and I'm talking about *billions* of transactions in many cases- for sap the final realization before cancellation was it would cost a billion dollars every year for hardware to run it-- and it was supposed to save a hundred million dollars a year). The flex thing was funny. A 60mb executable downloaded every time it was changed... and 30% of the customers were on 9600 baud modems. And the risk was identified and they just said 'well the customers will comply". That did not end well.
In every case, the risky new stuff was done last except for the struts thing. There they did a proof of concept and there it wasn't a total failure.
Don't start your project until you prove the new technology will work (and under load).
There's one in florida which has only 20' high generators in a concrete bunker. Waves have exceeded that height (storm surge hasn't) within 60 miles of that site but nothing's being done to change it.
You only know you are on track when known issues using known techniques to address them are left to address.
Anything new needs to be addressed first. Before you do 300 million dollars worth of 'easy' stuff to stay 'on track'. Unfortunately, with big projects like that raising issues will often get people fired. After a company fires two or three people who raises issues, then people stop raising issues and just participates in the train wreck.
No, he argued that a population of women has a trait so the exceptional individuals hired by google shared that trait universally.
That's just dumb. Google doesn't hire populations of women. They hire human beings who meet their hiring criteria.
It might be the kind of thing an autistic person might say. But people without autism will recognize that Damore cherry picked data, engaged in illogic instead of logic, was going to upset a lot of high performing employees, and was going to do damage to Google's reputation with over half the population.
Let's see, 10,000 lazy fuckers can all drive to the store or 20 people can deliver the cornflakes with a lot less pollution, congestion, and at a low cost.
The context is walmart increasing prices to force me into their stores so I will buy more stuff while there. My comment is, if the item is cheaper on Amazon than Walmart's online price, then I'll order it online from Amazon.
I don't know about you but many of my chores are done from home- cheaper- than I used to do. I converted when I spent 3 hours, visiting 3 stores, and 2 gallons of gas trying to find a BBQ part. When I got home, I ordered the part for $22 and had it in my house 48 hours later. No wasted gas, no miles on my car, no risk of a ticket, accident, and time.
My time is worth at least $15 per hour. Car cost is about $0.50 per mile these days. You have to include those costs.
If it is local and not tagged "scam likely" I wait til I hear their voice to be sure then I set it down.
I really need a way to send all "scam likely" calls straight to bounce land. Or better an automated service that says "hello" to consume their time.
I finally had to turn my phone off when I go to sleep at night because scam calls were costing me sleep.
We need to get better end to end security on phones entering the united states. A call coming from outside of the country clearly can't be originating from a u.s. area code. and then you could set your phone to not accept international calls.
But I'm really headed towards a whitelisted phone. only numbers I approve will ring me.
So I'm going to spend 20 minutes getting dressed, locating my keys, driving to the store, waiting for them to bring it out, driving back home plus 10 miles of gasoline. Take the risk of getting a ticket, getting into an accident, getting my car dinged in the parking lot.
For 10 cents?
Walmart better hope there isn't a cheaper option on amazon.
It does suck for brick and mortar and it is destroying local economies. But it's one of the few ways middle income people actually get the benefits of increased productivity.
Your post shows you are completely ignorant of recent advances in A.I. research.
You need to go back to school.
Try the following.. read up on alphago and then go to youtube and watch Go masters observe and comment on Alphago's play. Then read up on alphago zero.
When you can comment more intelligently than a chatbot... come back and make a more informed criticism.
There are significant limitations on A.I. but it's moving fast. It may never become conscious. Or we may develop an A.I. with emergent consciousness in under a decade. Or we may develop a better theory of consciousness which allows us to implement A.I. with consciousness.
But you are pretty clueless so you need to go back and learn some more.
They passed being mechanisms that react in specific ways about 3 years ago.
They are not yet capable of independent thought but they have discovered new ideas which humans had failed to discover in 3,000 years of investigation.
They don't gain wisdom.
They do gain experience about particular subject matters.
They dont' contemplate.. the same way.
Most humans driving down the road are not conscious and are not intelligent. A small driving routine is executing and the rest of the brain is in a trance like state. Computers are not conscious yet. But they've made tremendous strides much faster than predicted. They may never be conscious. Or they might be conscious in a decade.
They are intelligent about particular subjects. More intelligent and insightful than humans. They are not generally intelligent as a 2 year old yet.
You, a human being, have turned your brain off- probably several years ago from your statements. It's time to turn it back on and get engaged.
What Musk said is a pretty accurate sound bite method. It takes a lot of words to actually lay out the scientific method. No one would have quoted the text below if Musk had taken the time to say them...
From school for dragons...
Home > How to Train Your Dragon > The Scientific Method > Scientific Method Steps Scientific Method Steps The âscientific methodâ(TM) merely refers to a broad framework for studying and learning more about the world around us in a scientific manner. It is not so much a series of absolute, unchangeable steps as a guideline to the method that must be used when trying to reach a scientifically acceptable theory about a subject matter. Therefore, it is not possible to provide a finite number of steps or an exact procedure for following the scientific method. However, the scientific method steps detailed below describe the main steps that scientists commonly take when conducting a scientific inquiry.
Steps of the Scientific Method Make an Observation Scientists are naturally curious about the world. While many people may pass by a curious phenomenon without sparing much thought for it, a scientific mind will take note of it as something worth further thought and investigation.
Form a Question After making an interesting observation, a scientific mind itches to find out more about it. This is in fact a natural phenomenon. If you have ever wondered why or how something occurs, you have been listening to the scientist in you. In the scientific method, a question converts general wonder and interest to a channelled line of thinking and inquiry.
Form a Hypothesis A hypothesis is an informed guess as to the possible answer of the question. The hypothesis may be formed as soon as the question is posed, or it may require a great deal of background research and inquiry. The purpose of the hypothesis is not to arrive at the perfect answer to the question but to provide a direction to further scientific investigation.
Conduct an Experiment Once a hypothesis has been formed, it must be tested. This is done by conducting a carefully designed and controlled experiment. The experiment is one of the most important steps in the scientific method, as it is used to prove a hypothesis right or wrong, and to formulate scientific theories. In order to be accepted as scientific proof for a theory, an experiment must meet certain conditions â" it must be controlled, i.e. it must test a single variable by keeping all other variables under control. The experiment must also be reproducible so that it can be tested for errors.
Analyse the Data and Draw a Conclusion As the experiment is conducted, it is important to note down the results. In any experiment, it is necessary to conduct several trials to ensure that the results are constant. The experimenter then analyses all the data and uses it to draw a conclusion regarding the strength of the hypothesis. If the data proves the hypothesis correct, the original question is answered. On the other hand, if the data disproves the hypothesis, the scientific inquiry continues by doing research to form a new hypothesis and then conducting an experiment to test it. This process goes on until a hypothesis can be proven correct by a scientific experiment.
The whole process is collaborative and is conducted in a clearly documented manner to help other scientists who are doing research in the same field. Throughout history, there are instances where scientists have stopped their research before completing all the steps of the scientific method, only to have the inquiry taken up and solved by another scientist interested in answering the same question.
Here is a better more formal writeup from the school of dragons.
Home > How to Train Your Dragon > The Scientific Method > Scientific Method Steps Scientific Method Steps The âscientific methodâ(TM) merely refers to a broad framework for studying and learning more about the world around us in a scientific manner. It is not so much a series of absolute, unchangeable steps as a guideline to the method that must be used when trying to reach a scientifically acceptable theory about a subject matter. Therefore, it is not possible to provide a finite number of steps or an exact procedure for following the scientific method. However, the scientific method steps detailed below describe the main steps that scientists commonly take when conducting a scientific inquiry.
Steps of the Scientific Method Make an Observation Scientists are naturally curious about the world. While many people may pass by a curious phenomenon without sparing much thought for it, a scientific mind will take note of it as something worth further thought and investigation.
Form a Question After making an interesting observation, a scientific mind itches to find out more about it. This is in fact a natural phenomenon. If you have ever wondered why or how something occurs, you have been listening to the scientist in you. In the scientific method, a question converts general wonder and interest to a channelled line of thinking and inquiry.
Form a Hypothesis A hypothesis is an informed guess as to the possible answer of the question. The hypothesis may be formed as soon as the question is posed, or it may require a great deal of background research and inquiry. The purpose of the hypothesis is not to arrive at the perfect answer to the question but to provide a direction to further scientific investigation.
Conduct an Experiment Once a hypothesis has been formed, it must be tested. This is done by conducting a carefully designed and controlled experiment. The experiment is one of the most important steps in the scientific method, as it is used to prove a hypothesis right or wrong, and to formulate scientific theories. In order to be accepted as scientific proof for a theory, an experiment must meet certain conditions â" it must be controlled, i.e. it must test a single variable by keeping all other variables under control. The experiment must also be reproducible so that it can be tested for errors.
Analyse the Data and Draw a Conclusion As the experiment is conducted, it is important to note down the results. In any experiment, it is necessary to conduct several trials to ensure that the results are constant. The experimenter then analyses all the data and uses it to draw a conclusion regarding the strength of the hypothesis. If the data proves the hypothesis correct, the original question is answered. On the other hand, if the data disproves the hypothesis, the scientific inquiry continues by doing research to form a new hypothesis and then conducting an experiment to test it. This process goes on until a hypothesis can be proven correct by a scientific experiment.
The whole process is collaborative and is conducted in a clearly documented manner to help other scientists who are doing research in the same field. Throughout history, there are instances where scientists have stopped their research before completing all the steps of the scientific method, only to have the inquiry taken up and solved by another scientist interested in answering the same question.
It is about measuring and collecting data in a repeatable way.
Then it is about developing theories which fit the available data which have predictive value.
Then it is about testing if those predictions can be tested successfully.
But nothing is ever proved.
Gravity could reverse tomorrow-- and the survivors would need to find a new theory that fit the repeatable, observable data that gravity occasionally reversed.
When you remove a person's job from the local economy, you actually remove about 7x their salary from the local economy.
Moving that job to china or destroying a job in china affects the global economy but a fraction of the amount that local economies are devastated by job loss.
And it's even more than that because when you know someone laid off, you also cut back on your spending.
As long as wages are so different, offshoring is inevitable.
If prices were allowed to drop in the 1st world, then we'd be okay. But we pay up to 50x for the same products because prices are set locally not globally. We pay $20 for a Tshirt that cost $1 to make which sells for $1.50 in china.
So the lower wages in china have greater buying power than you realize. It's only for things like automobiles and air conditioners that the world price is close to the lowest price.
Inflation is higher in 3rd world countries but their educational systems are pretty terrible so that limits their possible productivity. As their education improves and inflation slowly increases wages, things will even out.
But it's going to be a long time. And it could get really ugly. And it absolutely doesn't have to be as ugly as republicans are making it. Reasonable taxes, retraining, and protection for those who become unemployable are antithetical to republican values.
You should have seen the way they rolled out agile at my old place.
Fixed features, fixed delivery dates.
Agile became "work 80 hours or more per week to meet targets set by management".
I also loved their implementation of CMP. "People who write their own goals tend to meet them" became "management will write and assign your "own" goals to you". You will meet them if you want a raise. But wait... let's lay "stack ranking" over the top of that just for shits and giggles.
Every software methodology degraded to waterfall except RUP. And that wasn't because RUP was fantastic but because RUP had support from its direct upper management and the team using it got formal training and the team using it believed in RUP.
Alphago and Alphago Zero are learning from experience of playing the game.
It's learning by definition. It's not a program. It's not doing loockups.
It's not programmed. The base conditions were set but other than some instrumentations, the humans don't know why Alphago does what it does because they haven't played 134,000 games of go since breakfast.
Alphago Zero surpassed every human grand master go player in less than 100 hours. Human go masters are now learning new plays from it and Alphago.
Also, human brains that are not taught fairly quickly become incapable of learning.
Think of feral children- some who can't even learn to speak a language. Human brains need to be taught by other humans or their reasoning and logic and abstract thinking won't be there.
Slashdot Mirror
lol.
Since the freezer wasn't insanely cold, the more likely cause is the roommate was taking vodka and adding back in water until the alcohol level got too low.
True story...
The level in the bottle never changed but a friend's vodka froze in college. ;-)
I only get drunk or not. I'm happy and a little sleepy.
The only think that made me feel a little different was Absinthe. It's an odd "wakeful drunkenness" without as much shimmer as I get from other alcohols.
But I have a client who is mean as hell on whisky but a happy kitten on tequila.
Logically, it should make *no* difference between those two.
First- It was CRY protein allergy- not gluten allergy. Sorry about that- it was late.
Second "allergic taco shells" turns up dozens of pages of responses so I don't think you googled very hard.
Here are a couple.
http://www.culinarylore.com/fo...
http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/fl...
As I said, LABEL IT.
Then people can make an educated choice. If you sell GMO food at a slightly lower price people will buy it.
Stop trying to force them to eat it. Stop trying to hide it.
Actually, some GMO's are really unsafe.
Like corn that contains gluten. That's a particularly nasty one that already happened (easy to google - GMO corn taco bell).
I imagine anything with nut genes or shellfish genes inserted would also be pretty bad (potentially fatal).
If GMO is so great - LABEL IT.
Seriously - if it were just priced 10% lower and labeled as GMO, within 10 years most people would be eating it at full price and not care any more.
And people who were sensitive to gluten wouldn't be hospitalized after eating a corn taco shell.
Actually... it is. And a couple 12 oz sodas a day is not moderation.
If you are prone to diabetes, you'll get it with those plus the rest of the sugar snuck into your diet.
Of course, but if managers and executives decide you *will* use this great new technology they heard of which will be different this time, then prove it works or doesn't before spending a million bucks.
So many technology decisions on large projects are driving by ignorant upper managements. The SAP decision was pushed down directly from the board of directors. It was obvious very quickly that the technology wouldn't work from the bottom but anyone who pointed that out was fired. No proof of concept was done and a lot of easy but still costly construction work was done first.
All I'm saying is, if you are going to build a new house- test the ground you are building on to make sure it can support the load. It is the first and most critical part of the project and the most likely to kill your schedule. Implementing an order entry pattern isn't going to blow your schedule or your budget.
Well, I certainly didn't live the '1%" rule. I must have been blessed. Every project over a million dollars in budget had at least one new language, tool, or practice that it depended on to work.
Staff would only be a risk if you are building dynamic teams for projects. If you have stable staff, you know their capabilities. New staff always has the risk that they lied about their capabilities.
The interesting and expensive failures always had high budgets and big executive interest.
The Adobe Flex project... where flex was new, relied on a lot of contractors.. and was end of lifed by surprise right as the project finished. The SAP project where they fired people who raised risks that cost over a billion dollars (and was a *complete* failure that was *completely* rolled back. The ecommerce site written in this new thing called "struts" was a success but it took two years of polishing the deliverable to get there. It eventually (in another 6 years) became very reliable and when they tried to dump it, so many customers were upset that they had to back down. The new mobile apps where the tools were changing and unstable during the project. Web services. S.o.a.p. And the list goes on.
A common theme was assuming new stuff would work under load without testing that before proceeding with coding. Then the project got momentum and kept going when it was clear the new technology would not work under load (and I'm talking about *billions* of transactions in many cases- for sap the final realization before cancellation was it would cost a billion dollars every year for hardware to run it-- and it was supposed to save a hundred million dollars a year). The flex thing was funny. A 60mb executable downloaded every time it was changed... and 30% of the customers were on 9600 baud modems. And the risk was identified and they just said 'well the customers will comply". That did not end well.
In every case, the risky new stuff was done last except for the struts thing. There they did a proof of concept and there it wasn't a total failure.
Don't start your project until you prove the new technology will work (and under load).
There's one in florida which has only 20' high generators in a concrete bunker. Waves have exceeded that height (storm surge hasn't) within 60 miles of that site but nothing's being done to change it.
You only know you are on track when known issues using known techniques to address them are left to address.
Anything new needs to be addressed first. Before you do 300 million dollars worth of 'easy' stuff to stay 'on track'. Unfortunately, with big projects like that raising issues will often get people fired. After a company fires two or three people who raises issues, then people stop raising issues and just participates in the train wreck.
Trees are okay as long as you find a way to bury them without oxygen.
The problem is it would cost a lot of resources to cut down trillions of tons of trees and store them without oxygen.
If they could figure out a way to make carbon fiber or bucky balls, they might have value to pay for the process.
Of course, then there is a risk of eventually having too *little* carbon in the atmosphere.
No, he argued that a population of women has a trait so the exceptional individuals hired by google shared that trait universally.
That's just dumb. Google doesn't hire populations of women. They hire human beings who meet their hiring criteria.
It might be the kind of thing an autistic person might say. But people without autism will recognize that Damore cherry picked data, engaged in illogic instead of logic, was going to upset a lot of high performing employees, and was going to do damage to Google's reputation with over half the population.
As I said above... That's just dumb.
Let's see, 10,000 lazy fuckers can all drive to the store or 20 people can deliver the cornflakes with a lot less pollution, congestion, and at a low cost.
The context is walmart increasing prices to force me into their stores so I will buy more stuff while there. My comment is, if the item is cheaper on Amazon than Walmart's online price, then I'll order it online from Amazon.
I don't know about you but many of my chores are done from home- cheaper- than I used to do. I converted when I spent 3 hours, visiting 3 stores, and 2 gallons of gas trying to find a BBQ part. When I got home, I ordered the part for $22 and had it in my house 48 hours later. No wasted gas, no miles on my car, no risk of a ticket, accident, and time.
My time is worth at least $15 per hour. Car cost is about $0.50 per mile these days. You have to include those costs.
Then afterwards block the number.
If it is local and not tagged "scam likely" I wait til I hear their voice to be sure then I set it down.
I really need a way to send all "scam likely" calls straight to bounce land. Or better an automated service that says "hello" to consume their time.
I finally had to turn my phone off when I go to sleep at night because scam calls were costing me sleep.
We need to get better end to end security on phones entering the united states. A call coming from outside of the country clearly can't be originating from a u.s. area code. and then you could set your phone to not accept international calls.
But I'm really headed towards a whitelisted phone. only numbers I approve will ring me.
So I'm going to spend 20 minutes getting dressed, locating my keys, driving to the store, waiting for them to bring it out, driving back home plus 10 miles of gasoline. Take the risk of getting a ticket, getting into an accident, getting my car dinged in the parking lot.
For 10 cents?
Walmart better hope there isn't a cheaper option on amazon.
It does suck for brick and mortar and it is destroying local economies. But it's one of the few ways middle income people actually get the benefits of increased productivity.
Your post shows you are completely ignorant of recent advances in A.I. research.
You need to go back to school.
Try the following.. read up on alphago and then go to youtube and watch Go masters observe and comment on Alphago's play.
Then read up on alphago zero.
When you can comment more intelligently than a chatbot... come back and make a more informed criticism.
There are significant limitations on A.I. but it's moving fast. It may never become conscious. Or we may develop an A.I. with emergent consciousness in under a decade. Or we may develop a better theory of consciousness which allows us to implement A.I. with consciousness.
But you are pretty clueless so you need to go back and learn some more.
Computers are capable of learning now.
They passed being mechanisms that react in specific ways about 3 years ago.
They are not yet capable of independent thought but they have discovered new ideas which humans had failed to discover in 3,000 years of investigation.
They don't gain wisdom.
They do gain experience about particular subject matters.
They dont' contemplate.. the same way.
Most humans driving down the road are not conscious and are not intelligent. A small driving routine is executing and the rest of the brain is in a trance like state. Computers are not conscious yet. But they've made tremendous strides much faster than predicted. They may never be conscious. Or they might be conscious in a decade.
They are intelligent about particular subjects. More intelligent and insightful than humans. They are not generally intelligent as a 2 year old yet.
You, a human being, have turned your brain off- probably several years ago from your statements. It's time to turn it back on and get engaged.
What Musk said is a pretty accurate sound bite method.
It takes a lot of words to actually lay out the scientific method. No one would have quoted the text below if Musk had taken the time to say them...
From school for dragons...
Home > How to Train Your Dragon > The Scientific Method > Scientific Method Steps
Scientific Method Steps
The âscientific methodâ(TM) merely refers to a broad framework for studying and learning more about the world around us in a scientific manner. It is not so much a series of absolute, unchangeable steps as a guideline to the method that must be used when trying to reach a scientifically acceptable theory about a subject matter. Therefore, it is not possible to provide a finite number of steps or an exact procedure for following the scientific method. However, the scientific method steps detailed below describe the main steps that scientists commonly take when conducting a scientific inquiry.
Steps of the Scientific Method
Make an Observation
Scientists are naturally curious about the world. While many people may pass by a curious phenomenon without sparing much thought for it, a scientific mind will take note of it as something worth further thought and investigation.
Form a Question
After making an interesting observation, a scientific mind itches to find out more about it. This is in fact a natural phenomenon. If you have ever wondered why or how something occurs, you have been listening to the scientist in you. In the scientific method, a question converts general wonder and interest to a channelled line of thinking and inquiry.
Form a Hypothesis
A hypothesis is an informed guess as to the possible answer of the question. The hypothesis may be formed as soon as the question is posed, or it may require a great deal of background research and inquiry. The purpose of the hypothesis is not to arrive at the perfect answer to the question but to provide a direction to further scientific investigation.
Conduct an Experiment
Once a hypothesis has been formed, it must be tested. This is done by conducting a carefully designed and controlled experiment. The experiment is one of the most important steps in the scientific method, as it is used to prove a hypothesis right or wrong, and to formulate scientific theories. In order to be accepted as scientific proof for a theory, an experiment must meet certain conditions â" it must be controlled, i.e. it must test a single variable by keeping all other variables under control. The experiment must also be reproducible so that it can be tested for errors.
Analyse the Data and Draw a Conclusion
As the experiment is conducted, it is important to note down the results. In any experiment, it is necessary to conduct several trials to ensure that the results are constant. The experimenter then analyses all the data and uses it to draw a conclusion regarding the strength of the hypothesis. If the data proves the hypothesis correct, the original question is answered. On the other hand, if the data disproves the hypothesis, the scientific inquiry continues by doing research to form a new hypothesis and then conducting an experiment to test it. This process goes on until a hypothesis can be proven correct by a scientific experiment.
The whole process is collaborative and is conducted in a clearly documented manner to help other scientists who are doing research in the same field. Throughout history, there are instances where scientists have stopped their research before completing all the steps of the scientific method, only to have the inquiry taken up and solved by another scientist interested in answering the same question.
Here is a better more formal writeup from the school of dragons.
Home > How to Train Your Dragon > The Scientific Method > Scientific Method Steps
Scientific Method Steps
The âscientific methodâ(TM) merely refers to a broad framework for studying and learning more about the world around us in a scientific manner. It is not so much a series of absolute, unchangeable steps as a guideline to the method that must be used when trying to reach a scientifically acceptable theory about a subject matter. Therefore, it is not possible to provide a finite number of steps or an exact procedure for following the scientific method. However, the scientific method steps detailed below describe the main steps that scientists commonly take when conducting a scientific inquiry.
Steps of the Scientific Method
Make an Observation
Scientists are naturally curious about the world. While many people may pass by a curious phenomenon without sparing much thought for it, a scientific mind will take note of it as something worth further thought and investigation.
Form a Question
After making an interesting observation, a scientific mind itches to find out more about it. This is in fact a natural phenomenon. If you have ever wondered why or how something occurs, you have been listening to the scientist in you. In the scientific method, a question converts general wonder and interest to a channelled line of thinking and inquiry.
Form a Hypothesis
A hypothesis is an informed guess as to the possible answer of the question. The hypothesis may be formed as soon as the question is posed, or it may require a great deal of background research and inquiry. The purpose of the hypothesis is not to arrive at the perfect answer to the question but to provide a direction to further scientific investigation.
Conduct an Experiment
Once a hypothesis has been formed, it must be tested. This is done by conducting a carefully designed and controlled experiment. The experiment is one of the most important steps in the scientific method, as it is used to prove a hypothesis right or wrong, and to formulate scientific theories. In order to be accepted as scientific proof for a theory, an experiment must meet certain conditions â" it must be controlled, i.e. it must test a single variable by keeping all other variables under control. The experiment must also be reproducible so that it can be tested for errors.
Analyse the Data and Draw a Conclusion
As the experiment is conducted, it is important to note down the results. In any experiment, it is necessary to conduct several trials to ensure that the results are constant. The experimenter then analyses all the data and uses it to draw a conclusion regarding the strength of the hypothesis. If the data proves the hypothesis correct, the original question is answered. On the other hand, if the data disproves the hypothesis, the scientific inquiry continues by doing research to form a new hypothesis and then conducting an experiment to test it. This process goes on until a hypothesis can be proven correct by a scientific experiment.
The whole process is collaborative and is conducted in a clearly documented manner to help other scientists who are doing research in the same field. Throughout history, there are instances where scientists have stopped their research before completing all the steps of the scientific method, only to have the inquiry taken up and solved by another scientist interested in answering the same question.
science is not about proving or disproving.
It is about measuring and collecting data in a repeatable way.
Then it is about developing theories which fit the available data which have predictive value.
Then it is about testing if those predictions can be tested successfully.
But nothing is ever proved.
Gravity could reverse tomorrow-- and the survivors would need to find a new theory that fit the repeatable, observable data that gravity occasionally reversed.
When you remove a person's job from the local economy, you actually remove about 7x their salary from the local economy.
Moving that job to china or destroying a job in china affects the global economy but a fraction of the amount that local economies are devastated by job loss.
And it's even more than that because when you know someone laid off, you also cut back on your spending.
As long as wages are so different, offshoring is inevitable.
If prices were allowed to drop in the 1st world, then we'd be okay. But we pay up to 50x for the same products because prices are set locally not globally. We pay $20 for a Tshirt that cost $1 to make which sells for $1.50 in china.
So the lower wages in china have greater buying power than you realize. It's only for things like automobiles and air conditioners that the world price is close to the lowest price.
Inflation is higher in 3rd world countries but their educational systems are pretty terrible so that limits their possible productivity. As their education improves and inflation slowly increases wages, things will even out.
But it's going to be a long time. And it could get really ugly. And it absolutely doesn't have to be as ugly as republicans are making it. Reasonable taxes, retraining, and protection for those who become unemployable are antithetical to republican values.
So.. probably going to be pretty ugly.
Really smart people are much better at rationalizing.
It's partially a problem that they are right a lot. Over 80%- maybe over 90%. When they are wrong- they just can't see it.
It sounds like Musk actively tries to avoid this. Good for him.
Management fads are almost never done correctly.
You should have seen the way they rolled out agile at my old place.
Fixed features, fixed delivery dates.
Agile became "work 80 hours or more per week to meet targets set by management".
I also loved their implementation of CMP.
"People who write their own goals tend to meet them" became "management will write and assign your "own" goals to you". You will meet them if you want a raise. But wait... let's lay "stack ranking" over the top of that just for shits and giggles.
Every software methodology degraded to waterfall except RUP. And that wasn't because RUP was fantastic but because RUP had support from its direct upper management and the team using it got formal training and the team using it believed in RUP.
No.
Alphago and Alphago Zero are learning from experience of playing the game.
It's learning by definition. It's not a program. It's not doing loockups.
It's not programmed. The base conditions were set but other than some instrumentations, the humans don't know why Alphago does what it does because they haven't played 134,000 games of go since breakfast.
Alphago Zero surpassed every human grand master go player in less than 100 hours. Human go masters are now learning new plays from it and Alphago.
Also, human brains that are not taught fairly quickly become incapable of learning.
Think of feral children- some who can't even learn to speak a language. Human brains need to be taught by other humans or their reasoning and logic and abstract thinking won't be there.