"Physically possible" does buy you exactly nothing. Your reasoning is also fundamentally flawed, because there are loads of "physically possible" things that are not practically possible in this universe, much less for the human race. Also you seem to be completely unaware how applied research works, because it is _not_ a matter of money spent beyond a pretty low threshold. In fact, there are indicators that you slow research down if you invest too much money, because you get more and more people with mediocre talent in.
Nobody says anything about doing nothing for 100 years. But remember that we still have no permanent base on the moon and that one is orders of magnitudes simpler as it _can_ be supplied from Earth? In fact, we do not have a replacement project for the ISS at this time. This tells me that 100 years for a realistic attempt at a permanent human presence on Mars is optimistic. Of course that also requires that human civilization does not go down the drains in that time and there are some rather huge challenges coming in that area in this time-frame.
This is part of a global trend and the fascistoid governments in power in far too many places these days take cues from each other. I take it you live on this planet? Then it _is_ your business.
Indeed. And here I was, thinking that forgetting about history was mainly a failure of western culture. If the _Japanese_ manage it, then it is a fundamental human problem.
I don't know what version you tried last, but I recently moved over from Opera 12.x after using both in parallel for a while. The only major thing I find is that the bookmark functionality is not really good, but "Neater Bookmarks" fixed that for me.
I finally switched over to Vivaldi from Opera 12.x after finding "Neater Bookmarks". While not perfect at this time, Vivaldi is very usable, stable and fast. All other browsers I tried are worse IMO, although I keep FF around for the few pages that do not work with Vivaldi. Lately I found that these often do not work with FF too and usually not even with IE.
Sure, Vivaldi is not mainstream, and those that are desperately afraid to be seen using anything not in the mainstream will deride it without any understanding what they are talking about. But that is about the only drawback I can see.
IQ is mostly immaterial to it. IQ does not include you ability to apply that intelligence and it does not include the skill to determine where it makes sense to apply that intelligence. Of course, you need some level of IQ to be able to actually solve the questions you have identified as worthwhile, but a lot of people have that.
The trick is successful independent thinking, and, for the popular "definition" of "genius", luck in the sense that your contribution is something that gets hyped in the popular opinion.
Take Newton for example. That cretin set mathematics back a few decades by ruthlessly pushing his own inferior integral definition over the vastly superior one by Leibniz. Without Newton, quite a few follow-up things in mathematics would have gone a lot faster. His "breakthroughs" in Physics are of similar quality: He was first to publish, but it took a lot of cleanup because his approach was pretty bad. And without him, things would have been vastly done better just a few years later, while with him it took decades of stagnation and cleanup. However, public opinion sees him as a "genius". In actual reality he was a pretty incompetent megalomaniac hack that did many disservices to Science.
Not at all. Most insanity is destructive. These people are/were not insane at all. They just did not give a damn what others think. The average human being, however, is so focused on what others think that they can regularly not even recognize clear nonsense. The critical characteristic needed for making mental breakthroughs is not high intelligence. That one, a lot of people have. It is the ability to use it independently and most people (even most highly intelligent ones) fail at that completely. Intelligence does not help if you do not use it.
That would indicate that the dumb ones are on the side of the tab. Maybe they do not even know how indention using spaces works or that a sane editor does most of it automatically.
Indeed. And there are a lot of areas that would benefit hugely from the general intelligence a human moron has. Cannot be done at this time and is not even on the distant horizon as there is no credible theory how it could be done.
German interior ministers immediately lose their minds when coming into office and start to look up what the Nazis did to keep the population under control and then try to find ways to improve on that. It is not known what causes the effect, but the current office-holder is even more affected than usual, probably because he has no useful skills at all.
They never worked. They usually made things worse. But this is politics, whether something works is unimportant, it only matters whether something sounds good to the ignorant masses.
Slashdot Mirror
"Physically possible" does buy you exactly nothing. Your reasoning is also fundamentally flawed, because there are loads of "physically possible" things that are not practically possible in this universe, much less for the human race. Also you seem to be completely unaware how applied research works, because it is _not_ a matter of money spent beyond a pretty low threshold. In fact, there are indicators that you slow research down if you invest too much money, because you get more and more people with mediocre talent in.
I actually did look before claiming anything. Seems you have a pretty "special" definition of "speed indicator".
Nobody says anything about doing nothing for 100 years. But remember that we still have no permanent base on the moon and that one is orders of magnitudes simpler as it _can_ be supplied from Earth? In fact, we do not have a replacement project for the ISS at this time. This tells me that 100 years for a realistic attempt at a permanent human presence on Mars is optimistic. Of course that also requires that human civilization does not go down the drains in that time and there are some rather huge challenges coming in that area in this time-frame.
They are technologically impossible at the moment. Economics does not even come into it.
Hard to explain these completely unrealistic visions otherwise.
This is part of a global trend and the fascistoid governments in power in far too many places these days take cues from each other. I take it you live on this planet? Then it _is_ your business.
On the other hand, being Japanese, they probably can get away with just apologizing when they are found out having lied.
Indeed. And here I was, thinking that forgetting about history was mainly a failure of western culture. If the _Japanese_ manage it, then it is a fundamental human problem.
I don't know when they added that, but this currently works.
Try the "Neater Bookmarks" Chrome addon. Not quite back to Opera 12.x but close enough for me.
I don't know what version you tried last, but I recently moved over from Opera 12.x after using both in parallel for a while. The only major thing I find is that the bookmark functionality is not really good, but "Neater Bookmarks" fixed that for me.
For pages, I actually find that quite nice. It reduces my stress-levels. For file-downloads it does of course have a speed and progress indicator.
"the browser’s business model will be the standard affiliate-deal affair" from https://gigaom.com/2015/01/27/...
Their team is small and hence they do not need much revenue.
I finally switched over to Vivaldi from Opera 12.x after finding "Neater Bookmarks". While not perfect at this time, Vivaldi is very usable, stable and fast. All other browsers I tried are worse IMO, although I keep FF around for the few pages that do not work with Vivaldi. Lately I found that these often do not work with FF too and usually not even with IE.
Sure, Vivaldi is not mainstream, and those that are desperately afraid to be seen using anything not in the mainstream will deride it without any understanding what they are talking about. But that is about the only drawback I can see.
Thank you for extremely bad advice? Not likely.
While I support your attempts to promote Dadaism, you need to work on execution and targets.
IQ is mostly immaterial to it. IQ does not include you ability to apply that intelligence and it does not include the skill to determine where it makes sense to apply that intelligence. Of course, you need some level of IQ to be able to actually solve the questions you have identified as worthwhile, but a lot of people have that.
The trick is successful independent thinking, and, for the popular "definition" of "genius", luck in the sense that your contribution is something that gets hyped in the popular opinion.
Take Newton for example. That cretin set mathematics back a few decades by ruthlessly pushing his own inferior integral definition over the vastly superior one by Leibniz. Without Newton, quite a few follow-up things in mathematics would have gone a lot faster. His "breakthroughs" in Physics are of similar quality: He was first to publish, but it took a lot of cleanup because his approach was pretty bad. And without him, things would have been vastly done better just a few years later, while with him it took decades of stagnation and cleanup. However, public opinion sees him as a "genius". In actual reality he was a pretty incompetent megalomaniac hack that did many disservices to Science.
Not at all. Most insanity is destructive. These people are/were not insane at all. They just did not give a damn what others think. The average human being, however, is so focused on what others think that they can regularly not even recognize clear nonsense. The critical characteristic needed for making mental breakthroughs is not high intelligence. That one, a lot of people have. It is the ability to use it independently and most people (even most highly intelligent ones) fail at that completely. Intelligence does not help if you do not use it.
That would indicate that the dumb ones are on the side of the tab. Maybe they do not even know how indention using spaces works or that a sane editor does most of it automatically.
Ah, no? My editor does it for me, mostly. Maybe the lesson here is that competent developers use better editors?
Yes, that would be interesting. Of course, no actual experts are going to disgrace themselves this way.
Indeed. And there are a lot of areas that would benefit hugely from the general intelligence a human moron has. Cannot be done at this time and is not even on the distant horizon as there is no credible theory how it could be done.
The AI fanatics are blind and stupid.
German interior ministers immediately lose their minds when coming into office and start to look up what the Nazis did to keep the population under control and then try to find ways to improve on that. It is not known what causes the effect, but the current office-holder is even more affected than usual, probably because he has no useful skills at all.
They never worked. They usually made things worse. But this is politics, whether something works is unimportant, it only matters whether something sounds good to the ignorant masses.
That would mean getting rid of a major part of the population as well. You cannot fix stupid.