"Sorry cunt, but I have no time for idiots like you"
I didn't read any of your post, because you had already proven you're not worth wasting time on.
Read that until you get it, or better yet, have someone smarter than you read it to you and explain it. Oh please no! Don't give up on me! I really want to learn from a master who is so superior to me, a humble pupil. I have mastered the infinited dimensions of Hilbert-space, I have calculated all the Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials for the Lie group E8 by hand, I have found a proof for Fermats last theorem small enough to print on a t-shirt and now I want to understand these wise words you gave me.
Please, one more time, explain to me why you are referring to me with words normally used to describe female genitalia...
Thank you for that detailled response, I learned a lot from it. I agree with you competely that human speech is superior to animal speech due to its much more complex grammar and syntax and that we wouldn't have been able to achieve many things without it. Still, your first post suggests that animals aren't capable of real (very basic) speech, which I find highly troubling, given the huge amount of prejudice displayed in various other posts.
"So you are just rambling about something you admit you don't have knowledge about. Fine."
No, my background is behavioral psychology, not language acquisition. This is the kind of logic that got you in trouble in the first place, and made you think you were right when in reality you're just too stupid to know how wrong you are. Thanks for calling me a "cunt". A behaviour really fitting of a psychologist, isn't it. But let me guess: you only started to study psychology but never finished, otherwise you would be calling yourself a "behavioural psychologist", no?
So I'm now thinking you are acting out your inferiority complex by insisting that animals must be sub-human in each and every regard. Hmm, given your way with assigning animal names to people I should remove the word "complex"...
"No, I'm not. I'm assigning CAPABILITIES that are present in humans to a non-human."
Which is exactly the definition of anthropomorphism. I'm glad you admit it. Let me spell it out for you: "Anthropomorphism is the attribution of UNIQUELY human characteristics and qualities to nonhuman beings, inanimate objects, or natural or supernatural phenomena." As we have seen, speech and rational thought is not unique (or common) in humans. Thus, no anthropomorphism.
"Please, oh please, I want to learn, badly. Tell me more about my mistakes..."
Speaking, breathing, I pray I'm wrong, but breeding. Sharing your opinion, and commenting on a subject you're clearly not qualified for. No, you're right, my PhD in physics doesn't make me qualified to comment on the subject. But your excellent handling of foul words makes you the top-notch specialist on the matter, whose words should be taken without proof or doubt.
You're wrong, and you're (now) deliberately misrepresenting data to support a point that has been discredited for years. Discredited? Well, as long as it hasn't been disproven... Being discredited doesn't mean it's wrong. It means that somebody wants to get rid of it but hasn't any rational reasoning or legal means...
You want to learn? STOP BEING A FUCKING TWAT AND ASSUMING THE ARTICLE YOU READ IN NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC IS TRUE.
It just makes you look even more like an ignorant slut. Let me make another educated guess: you didn't have good sex in a looooong while. Otherwise I cannot explain your abundant abuse of words describing female genitalia. Maybe you could share some light on that matter for all of us?
"so then you might elucidate us as to what the reasons are that humans use language, and which of those reasons are so human-spcific that they cannot be found in animals?"
No actually I won't. It's not my field. So you are just rambling about something you admit you don't have knowledge about. Fine.
"koko has the vocabulary of a roughly five-year-old and is using it to the same extent"
Inaccurate. No explanation why it is inaccurate? Because God told you so?
"she understands spoken language and can even read a few written words."
Inaccurate. But she does.
"she names things by herself by combining words intelligently"
No, she most certainly does not. This is the most inaccurate statement so far. Yes, she does. She called a ring a "finger bracelet" when she didn't know the word for it. So she is capable of defining an object based on its traits.
"she never saw another kid reading a book to itself"
She HAS, however, seen adults do it. No, she hasn't.
This makes no sense. Yes it does too.
You are assigning human traits to a non-human. No, I'm not. I'm assigning CAPABILITIES to a non-human.
Regardless of whether it is appropriate or not, it is the VERY DEFINITION of anthropomorphism. No, anthropomorphism would be if I'd suggest she should got to kindergarten or be allowed to go shopping. I'm not doing this. All I say is that she has the capability to rational thought and to communication of abstract ideas.
You illustrate my point nicely. Rather than examine my criticisms, you respond by reasserting that you are not doing something that you are, in fact, doing the textbook definition of. You are so attached to your pre conceived notions that you flatly reuse to even admit you're doing something that is clear in black and white. Which criticism? Refuting my statements with "Inaccurate"? How constructive...
THIS and people like YOU are why I generally avoid these topics. Fine with me. PLease leave while you can.
It is simply futile to argue with a zealot who denies their actions in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Yes it is. So I will stop.
We can continue this if you choose, but you'll have to examine your opinions more carefully. I have no desire to waste my time trying to educate any more zealots. Please, oh please, I want to learn, badly. Tell me more about my mistakes...
Koko does not use a complex, and consistent syntax. 90% of slashdot-user don't do this either, what was your point again?
I will not argue that she does not have a form of protolanguage, and is adept at communicating information to her handlers, however, this is still significantly different from humans. Yes, and a three-year-old has a language that is significantly different from adults.
As a forbidden experiment, let's place about, say 25, children with no language experience together. The result? They will invent a language spontaneously without being directly taught. If this experiment is forbidden, who has done it? Nobody? So it is only a theory then, isn't it? Well, why is it that feral children haven't spontainiously developed their own language? If you would now like to point out that Nell did this: she already had been taught the beginning of a language by others and developed it from there on her own. But there are NO indications that you experiment would yield that result.
Most certainly you must be confused... I do not feel that language makes us superior to animals, but it does make us unique and different from animals. Obviously not THAT unique and different. What about N'kisi? Or Alex? Both are talking parrots that clearly demonstrate that they are capable of reasoning.
And as far as "delusions of grandeur" regarding human capabilities, I suppose I'm imagining culture, civilization, technology, and the Internet? Apes have been shown to be capable of producing culture. Many animals use tools and teach this tool-usage to their offspring. And there is a very fitting Douglas-Adams-quote somewhere in this thread...
We are able to pass on knowledge and invention easily through our use of language, which has lead to all sorts of progress... Unfortunately this progress hasn't resulted in humans being able to control their inner feelings and wantings. Challenge a human who is used to cross streets on red to will himself to stop doing that and from now on always wait for green, even if it is the middle of the night and no car is coming. Not only will he not be able to comply but you will be astonished what kind of excuses and reasonings you will hear why this is a stupid idea...
Note, this still does not make us "better" than animals... it makes us simply different, and unique. Your evaluation of "better" or "superior" may differ from mine. Right. But that was not evident in your first posting where you stated that all forms of animal speech are just training and/or wishful thinking...
so then you might elucidate us as to what the reasons are that humans use language, and which of those reasons are so human-spcific that they cannot be found in animals?
koko has the vocabulary of a roughly five-year-old and is using it to the same extent. she understands spoken language and can even read a few written words. she names things by herself by combining words intelligently, a "ring" was called "finger-bracelet" by her until somebody told her the right word for it. she never saw another kid reading a book to itself, so she clearly cannot be imitating there.
she might not be smart enough to follow this discussion or understand the subtle insults (thank you for not using the same rude language you are using in other recent posts) you are directing against me but neither are 99% of the american population.
i'm not anthropomorphizing, i'm simply seeing without prejudice that apes are siblings that share a lot of our mental capabilities.
[sarcasm on]
oh yeah, apes are just faking it. and that koko has been reading picture books to herself at bedtime just like a school kid would do, it's only imitation. that she has the wish to express herself via paintings and drawings, that's no sign for intelligence. and that she invents new words is a sign for... what?
you, as many others, suffer from delusions of grandeur regarding human capabilities...
What if the Apache Fuondation would now revoke the Apache license just for the RIAA and clearly state that such organisations are from now on barred to use Apache products? I would LOVE to see such clauses in licenses: "If you are doing evil things, you may not use this product".
The problem I see with that scenario: how can you be sure your algorithm is really OK unless someone else has tested it? Or has verified you mathematical proof? Substitute "compression" with "encryption" and it becomes the typical snake-oil-scenario that Bruce Schneier often reports about...
If you are a really brilliant mathematician, you will be on a grant from a university, right? So you are financially secure and will become famous for that brilliant idea. What else could you want?;-)
I'm not so sure that renting software is a wet dream, or else M$ would long have done it. The reason: when renting something you cannot disclaim liability for defects. Just as landlords have to keep the plumbing et al in working condition (else you stop paying your rent), SW manufacturers have to fix ALL bugs or they don't get paid.
Come to think of, this actually is a USERs wet dream...:-)
Grid Data Security's GridOne uses a very similar approach: they present an on-screen alphanumeric entry grid, with each character surrounded by four randomly-generated numbers, one in each corner of the cell.
Hmm, but this only works once. What this basically does is to send a group of several passwords and the server then checks if one of the mapped passwords is the right one. If you can capture two different password entries with this system you just have to figure out which of the passwords in the two groups was in both groups and viola! Password hacked.
The got it right (IMHO): 50% of every purchase goes to the artist. You can choose how much you want to pay. You can listen to everything in full. You get the choice of several formats to download. You are encouraged to share the download link with friends. Sounds good? I think this is how online music distribution should be handled.
I am also using the 3M Ergonomic Mouse (see picture) and am very happy with it.
With it, you use your thumb for clicking and your whole hand for mouse movements (which may take a day to get used to), so your carpal tunnel stays nearly completely stress-free. But you do need a proper support for your elbow/underarm, either on the table or on your seats armrest.
With the Zero Tension Mouse you still use your index/middle finger to click, which still stresses your carpal tunnel somewhat. But it does give you a thumb scroll wheel, which the 3M Mouse doesn't have.
So, yes, parent is right, the Zero Tension Mouse is nothing new and doesn't look like it is in any way superior to the 3M Ergonomic Mouse.
Is the submitter implying that the cell phone company should graciously provide this service for free?
no, but one could expect the phone company to charge only their real costs in this case of public interest and not the over-inflated cash-cow-rate for sms that regular customers have to pay...
I can remember from my Lab days (boy, has it been really 20 years?!) a Burr-Brown amm-meter that had an electron-count mode where it would display "electrons per second" (actually unit-charges) instead of femto-amperes. Sure, it only counted in about 100-electron steps, but I think that's fair enough...:-)
I'd prefer Hydrogen Hydroxide. While it's a little bit more reactive than Dihydrogen Monoxide, it doesn't have the negative connotations that Carbon Monoxide has...
proprietary is introduced at the end of the summary. It's something of a non-sequitur because up to that point, the discussion has been about monocultures, which looks like an orthagonal issue.
Hmm, but a proprietary monoculture has no way to develop into something else. In an open monoculture, people at least have the choice to step out. That's what O/S is all about: choice.
So IMHO the tag proprietary is relevant because it is making a bad situation even worse...
It is possible to break ANY encryption scheme by brute-force (trying all possible keys). The question is: how long will it take? Getting at the information of the phone talk several months afterwards is close enough to "unbreakable" for most applications...
I had hope for a short time that they managed to produce nanotubes out of polymer via enzymes. This would have been a significant step towards...
*tadah*
TERATUBES!!
Imagine you could spin nanotubes that are thousands of kilometers long... Imagine weaving those teratubes into cables... Imagine lowering these cables from orbit and running escalators up and down... Imagine using the cables to send down electric power from orbit... Imagine the impact on our future society...
*sigh* But of course this is off-topic, so feel free to mod me down...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't read any of your post, because you had already proven you're not worth wasting time on.
Read that until you get it, or better yet, have someone smarter than you read it to you and explain it. Oh please no! Don't give up on me! I really want to learn from a master who is so superior to me, a humble pupil. I have mastered the infinited dimensions of Hilbert-space, I have calculated all the Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials for the Lie group E8 by hand, I have found a proof for Fermats last theorem small enough to print on a t-shirt and now I want to understand these wise words you gave me.
Please, one more time, explain to me why you are referring to me with words normally used to describe female genitalia...
Thank you for that detailled response, I learned a lot from it. I agree with you competely that human speech is superior to animal speech due to its much more complex grammar and syntax and that we wouldn't have been able to achieve many things without it. Still, your first post suggests that animals aren't capable of real (very basic) speech, which I find highly troubling, given the huge amount of prejudice displayed in various other posts.
No, my background is behavioral psychology, not language acquisition. This is the kind of logic that got you in trouble in the first place, and made you think you were right when in reality you're just too stupid to know how wrong you are. Thanks for calling me a "cunt". A behaviour really fitting of a psychologist, isn't it. But let me guess: you only started to study psychology but never finished, otherwise you would be calling yourself a "behavioural psychologist", no?
So I'm now thinking you are acting out your inferiority complex by insisting that animals must be sub-human in each and every regard. Hmm, given your way with assigning animal names to people I should remove the word "complex"... "No, I'm not. I'm assigning CAPABILITIES that are present in humans to a non-human."
Which is exactly the definition of anthropomorphism. I'm glad you admit it. Let me spell it out for you: "Anthropomorphism is the attribution of UNIQUELY human characteristics and qualities to nonhuman beings, inanimate objects, or natural or supernatural phenomena." As we have seen, speech and rational thought is not unique (or common) in humans. Thus, no anthropomorphism. "Please, oh please, I want to learn, badly. Tell me more about my mistakes..."
Speaking, breathing, I pray I'm wrong, but breeding. Sharing your opinion, and commenting on a subject you're clearly not qualified for. No, you're right, my PhD in physics doesn't make me qualified to comment on the subject. But your excellent handling of foul words makes you the top-notch specialist on the matter, whose words should be taken without proof or doubt. You're wrong, and you're (now) deliberately misrepresenting data to support a point that has been discredited for years. Discredited? Well, as long as it hasn't been disproven... Being discredited doesn't mean it's wrong. It means that somebody wants to get rid of it but hasn't any rational reasoning or legal means... You want to learn? STOP BEING A FUCKING TWAT AND ASSUMING THE ARTICLE YOU READ IN NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC IS TRUE.
It just makes you look even more like an ignorant slut. Let me make another educated guess: you didn't have good sex in a looooong while. Otherwise I cannot explain your abundant abuse of words describing female genitalia. Maybe you could share some light on that matter for all of us?
No actually I won't. It's not my field. So you are just rambling about something you admit you don't have knowledge about. Fine. "koko has the vocabulary of a roughly five-year-old and is using it to the same extent"
Inaccurate. No explanation why it is inaccurate? Because God told you so? "she understands spoken language and can even read a few written words."
Inaccurate. But she does. "she names things by herself by combining words intelligently"
No, she most certainly does not. This is the most inaccurate statement so far. Yes, she does. She called a ring a "finger bracelet" when she didn't know the word for it. So she is capable of defining an object based on its traits. "she never saw another kid reading a book to itself"
She HAS, however, seen adults do it. No, she hasn't. This makes no sense. Yes it does too. You are assigning human traits to a non-human. No, I'm not. I'm assigning CAPABILITIES to a non-human. Regardless of whether it is appropriate or not, it is the VERY DEFINITION of anthropomorphism. No, anthropomorphism would be if I'd suggest she should got to kindergarten or be allowed to go shopping. I'm not doing this. All I say is that she has the capability to rational thought and to communication of abstract ideas. You illustrate my point nicely. Rather than examine my criticisms, you respond by reasserting that you are not doing something that you are, in fact, doing the textbook definition of. You are so attached to your pre conceived notions that you flatly reuse to even admit you're doing something that is clear in black and white. Which criticism? Refuting my statements with "Inaccurate"? How constructive... THIS and people like YOU are why I generally avoid these topics. Fine with me. PLease leave while you can. It is simply futile to argue with a zealot who denies their actions in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Yes it is. So I will stop. We can continue this if you choose, but you'll have to examine your opinions more carefully. I have no desire to waste my time trying to educate any more zealots. Please, oh please, I want to learn, badly. Tell me more about my mistakes...
so then you might elucidate us as to what the reasons are that humans use language, and which of those reasons are so human-spcific that they cannot be found in animals?
koko has the vocabulary of a roughly five-year-old and is using it to the same extent. she understands spoken language and can even read a few written words. she names things by herself by combining words intelligently, a "ring" was called "finger-bracelet" by her until somebody told her the right word for it. she never saw another kid reading a book to itself, so she clearly cannot be imitating there.
she might not be smart enough to follow this discussion or understand the subtle insults (thank you for not using the same rude language you are using in other recent posts) you are directing against me but neither are 99% of the american population.
i'm not anthropomorphizing, i'm simply seeing without prejudice that apes are siblings that share a lot of our mental capabilities.
[sarcasm on]
oh yeah, apes are just faking it. and that koko has been reading picture books to herself at bedtime just like a school kid would do, it's only imitation. that she has the wish to express herself via paintings and drawings, that's no sign for intelligence. and that she invents new words is a sign for... what?
you, as many others, suffer from delusions of grandeur regarding human capabilities...
What if the Apache Fuondation would now revoke the Apache license just for the RIAA and clearly state that such organisations are from now on barred to use Apache products? I would LOVE to see such clauses in licenses: "If you are doing evil things, you may not use this product".
But I'm dreaming...
It's all about having a cable going from a place with lots of space and lots of sunlight down to where that power is needed.
IMHO a space tether will mainly solve our energy problem, cheap access to space is only a by-product...
What if pigs could fly? :-)
;-)
The problem I see with that scenario: how can you be sure your algorithm is really OK unless someone else has tested it? Or has verified you mathematical proof? Substitute "compression" with "encryption" and it becomes the typical snake-oil-scenario that Bruce Schneier often reports about...
If you are a really brilliant mathematician, you will be on a grant from a university, right? So you are financially secure and will become famous for that brilliant idea. What else could you want?
I'm not so sure that renting software is a wet dream, or else M$ would long have done it. The reason: when renting something you cannot disclaim liability for defects. Just as landlords have to keep the plumbing et al in working condition (else you stop paying your rent), SW manufacturers have to fix ALL bugs or they don't get paid.
:-)
Come to think of, this actually is a USERs wet dream...
Grid Data Security's GridOne uses a very similar approach: they present an on-screen alphanumeric entry grid, with each character surrounded by four randomly-generated numbers, one in each corner of the cell.
Hmm, but this only works once. What this basically does is to send a group of several passwords and the server then checks if one of the mapped passwords is the right one. If you can capture two different password entries with this system you just have to figure out which of the passwords in the two groups was in both groups and viola! Password hacked.
This begs for the question:
:-)
"Are audiophiles the same to audio as pedophiles are to children?"
Sorry, couldn't resist...
The got it right (IMHO): 50% of every purchase goes to the artist. You can choose how much you want to pay. You can listen to everything in full. You get the choice of several formats to download. You are encouraged to share the download link with friends. Sounds good? I think this is how online music distribution should be handled.
Oh, and I'm just a satisfied customer...
I don't think there will be a T-shirt with that proof anytime soon... :o)
;o)
Unless/until somebody comes up with a suitably compressed notation. B-)
A pity that Feynman isn't around anymore. His graphs would just do the trick...
I don't think there will be a T-shirt with that proof anytime soon... :o)
I am also using the 3M Ergonomic Mouse (see picture) and am very happy with it.
With it, you use your thumb for clicking and your whole hand for mouse movements (which may take a day to get used to), so your carpal tunnel stays nearly completely stress-free. But you do need a proper support for your elbow/underarm, either on the table or on your seats armrest.
With the Zero Tension Mouse you still use your index/middle finger to click, which still stresses your carpal tunnel somewhat. But it does give you a thumb scroll wheel, which the 3M Mouse doesn't have.
So, yes, parent is right, the Zero Tension Mouse is nothing new and doesn't look like it is in any way superior to the 3M Ergonomic Mouse.
Is the submitter implying that the cell phone company should graciously provide this service for free?
no, but one could expect the phone company to charge only their real costs in this case of public interest and not the over-inflated cash-cow-rate for sms that regular customers have to pay...
I can remember from my Lab days (boy, has it been really 20 years?!) a Burr-Brown amm-meter that had an electron-count mode where it would display "electrons per second" (actually unit-charges) instead of femto-amperes. Sure, it only counted in about 100-electron steps, but I think that's fair enough... :-)
How about some Dihydrogen Monoxide instead?
I'd prefer Hydrogen Hydroxide. While it's a little bit more reactive than Dihydrogen Monoxide, it doesn't have the negative connotations that Carbon Monoxide has...
I mean in a form that is playable on current GHz machines?
Alternatively, which emulator/vm would you recommend?
proprietary is introduced at the end of the summary. It's something of a non-sequitur because up to that point, the discussion has been about monocultures, which looks like an orthagonal issue.
Hmm, but a proprietary monoculture has no way to develop into something else. In an open monoculture, people at least have the choice to step out. That's what O/S is all about: choice.
So IMHO the tag proprietary is relevant because it is making a bad situation even worse...
If you can brute-force 128-bit crypto in "several months", you probably have figured out some way to change the laws of physics.
;o)
Umm, you do have noticed my nickname, haven't you?
It is possible to break ANY encryption scheme by brute-force (trying all possible keys). The question is: how long will it take? Getting at the information of the phone talk several months afterwards is close enough to "unbreakable" for most applications...
*sigh*
;-)
I had hope for a short time that they managed to produce nanotubes out of polymer via enzymes. This would have been a significant step towards...
*tadah*
TERATUBES!!
Imagine you could spin nanotubes that are thousands of kilometers long...
Imagine weaving those teratubes into cables...
Imagine lowering these cables from orbit and running escalators up and down...
Imagine using the cables to send down electric power from orbit...
Imagine the impact on our future society...
*sigh*
But of course this is off-topic, so feel free to mod me down...