Learning is merely the acquisition of knowledge. This includes acquiring the knowledge of new methods of thought, or new ways to think. But actually thinking, and rewiring the brain to think in a certain way, is completely different.
You can teach knowledge, but you can't teach people how to think. They either do it or they don't. You can show them many methods to think, but you can't force them to think in a particular way.
Highway driving requires the most attention at high speeds, or while weaving through heavy (but moving) traffic. Driving unfamiliar or less familiar routes (like going to a shopping mall 50 miles away that you'd normally go to only twice a year) also require the same navigation abilities as city driving, but at a larger physical scale.
Map reading and route memorization helps maintain short term memory. This exercise is rendered moot by using a GPS. It also doesn't come into play when driving a familiar route, e.g. from home to work or from home to the grocery store.
Now television...that's the biggest intellect-killer out there. At least there's interaction when browsing or surfing the internet (for example, posting on/.), albeit minimal. But the brain is less active when watching TV than even when sleeping. On the other hand, constantly being online causes shorter attention spans. What suffers is concentration and focus, generally speaking, which is a necessary in order to solve difficult problems on the fly. It's the same skill that's necessary to do a complicated math problem completely in your head.
All in all, while TV causes an overall degradation of the brain, continuous use of the internet results in lateral movement, from being able to do a singular task very well to being able to do multiple things all at once. Whether this is a bad thing or not is an exercise left to the reader. I personally think that though a jack of all trades is master at none, it's important to at least have both vast but shallow knowledge, and one specific field of expertise. In effect, being able to do one thing really well, and being able to do many things but medially, are both important mental skills to hone and maintain.
Everyone here that posts has an agenda to put forward.
Certainly, but some are more forthright about it than others, allowing readers to compensate for the bias. To not do so is just plain dishonest, and generally frowned upon--at least in the society to which I belong.
This is par for the course. In fact, it's better than usual. Had this exact same story appeared a few years ago, there would've already been beard jokes, free as in beer jokes, GPL v3 jokes, and a whole conversation consisting of nothing but puns.
It's not "Russian." It's merely a product of a lack of regulation, oversight, and accountability. The only saving grace for this instance is that the fatal flaws unfortunately appeared before they could sell any.
Or, for that matter, if you have dirty power coming out of your main line, you'd only really need a power cleaner in one location for one group of machines.
A bit of exercise, and serious portion control goes a long way.
For example, instead of eating a small bag of chips every night, eat a big bag of chips (but not party-sized) once a week. Instead of eating all of the meat on a plate served to you at a restaurant, eat half of it and bag the other half for lunch the next day. Have a glass of juice or water instead of a soft drink.
For exercising, going out for a walk every day for about 30 minutes is more than sufficient for most people. A sport is great, but rarely absolutely necessary. A competitive sport can do more harm than good.
There's no need to jump through hoops or eat bad-tasting stuff. Even small changes make a big difference. Now, some people need the heavy exercise and the restrictive diet. But those are rarer than you'd think. Also, stay far, far away from the corn-derived products. That includes everything from corn oil to corn starch to ketchup and mustard to soft drinks.
In general, for people actually doing real work on their computers instead of browsing the web or watching TV or movies, the lower the aspect ratio and the higher the dot pitch, the better. Actually, browsing the web benefits with a lower aspect ratio too, so it's really only watching TV and movies where the high aspect ratio screens are relevant.
It has already been mentioned below, but bears mentioning again that the keyboard mechanics and the key layout are fairly important for developers too. Chiclet keyboards absolutely suck for heavy touch typing. Having a backlight on the keyboard is useful.
Developers are extremely text I/O heavy, unlike regular users who tend to be more output-oriented. For a developer, there is both a need to be able to input text efficiently and effectively, and process text output quickly and precisely.
On the other hand, things that are not as important to developers are refresh rates, color accuracy, and viewing angles. Optical drives, card readers, these can all be replaced by an extra USB port. Having the fastest CPU also is not a must, though it's a bonus. Size is also not nearly as important, though too big is not good, and too small is probably a bit difficult to achieve cost-effectively. But screen size is a non-factor if the dot pitch is small enough.
For the idealistic and naive, it's abhorring. For the realistic, it's how things get done.
Despite what they say of age and cynicism, there are more idealistic and naive people out there. At the least, there are plenty of people willing to feign outrage for an ulterior motive and often less savory outcome. Just look at U.S. politics these days.
It knows, but you don't. You don't because you haven't measured it yet. And until you measure it, the answer is not the simplified version of the cat being dead and alive at the same time, but that there's a probability it's dead, and a probability it's alive, but it'll never be more than probability until you actually confirm it. Once you confirm it by measurement, the probability of one state goes to one, and the probability of the other state goes to zero.
This goes back to the age-old question: If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? It certainly makes a noise, but does it make a sound?
If there's nothing to observe reality, does it still exist? That's the essence of Schrodinger's cat.
Almost killed by the people "protecting" her, that's what.
She's learning the hard way not to trust supposed authority figures. It's a lesson we all eventually learn, just some of us learn it earlier, or at least with less on the line.
It's not to say that all authority figures should be disregarded, but that there are more stupid people than smart ones, and that relationship holds equally true for those claiming or given authority.
Yeah, but spending money to wage war while not raising any taxes to fund it is not exactly sound either, and you're really skirting the point.
Besides, your $2 trillion over 10 years, assuming that it is an accurate number (I've heard bigger numbers), is still nothing to sniff at. At the very least, it would've put us one year and change of deficit less than where we are now.
So the question is, are you supporting fighting a war while cutting taxes? Or are you just nit picking on GP's numbers having nothing else of relevancy to say?
Actually, what happens a lot is that Google employees leave Google to establish their own start up that's based on some new idea. After a while, if they're successful, Google buys them back up.
In this way, Google gets to keep the idea but minimize the risk of putting out a product based on the idea.
Considering this is/. and nobody actually writes any of these stories (except for the occasional self-promoter/slashvertisement), all he really has to do to qualify as a shill is to submit others' stories with such a bias.
E.g. if he submits plenty of Google stories, but all of them are negative, while there've been a ton of positive news coming out of Google at the same time, that's sufficient to qualify as an anti-Google shill.
In this case, this particular submitted appears to be primarily submitting stories that cast everyone except apple in a negative light, with particular focus on all of Apple's major competitors, while submitting only positive stories about Apple. It's just naivete to think that this person is merely "focusing" on Apple. If all those other negative submissions didn't clue you in to that particular bit, I'm not sure you deserve your interesting moderation (but that's the moderators' fault).
It's fairly obvious based on the pattern of accepted stories somebody's propping Apple up while gunning for everybody else. Now, you can argue that perhaps certain editors are biased in the stories they accept, or perhaps the entire editorial staff has become biased. But there's no evidence of that (yet). The list is applicable onto to this particular user, and certainly cannot be extrapolated to represent the entire editorial staff.
Now, it's not wrong to be biased. It's just not journalism. Not that this site has a great track record of journalistic integrity, but knowing that someone is a shill is still better than not.
The stop-and-go style is primarily the cause of the injuries. The stop allows teams to reset so that they can line up directly facing each other. It gives the players a moment of rest. It allows them to put all of their energy into each moment of action.
The same thing is the reason for football's popularity. Brief moments of action followed by short periods of rest is the ideal for every form of entertainment (see how movies and TV shows are cut). Too much action and the spectator gets tired and starts to shut down after a while. Too little and the spectator gets bored.
Slashdot Mirror
This.
Learning is merely the acquisition of knowledge. This includes acquiring the knowledge of new methods of thought, or new ways to think. But actually thinking, and rewiring the brain to think in a certain way, is completely different.
You can teach knowledge, but you can't teach people how to think. They either do it or they don't. You can show them many methods to think, but you can't force them to think in a particular way.
Highway driving requires the most attention at high speeds, or while weaving through heavy (but moving) traffic. Driving unfamiliar or less familiar routes (like going to a shopping mall 50 miles away that you'd normally go to only twice a year) also require the same navigation abilities as city driving, but at a larger physical scale.
Map reading and route memorization helps maintain short term memory. This exercise is rendered moot by using a GPS. It also doesn't come into play when driving a familiar route, e.g. from home to work or from home to the grocery store.
Now television...that's the biggest intellect-killer out there. At least there's interaction when browsing or surfing the internet (for example, posting on /.), albeit minimal. But the brain is less active when watching TV than even when sleeping. On the other hand, constantly being online causes shorter attention spans. What suffers is concentration and focus, generally speaking, which is a necessary in order to solve difficult problems on the fly. It's the same skill that's necessary to do a complicated math problem completely in your head.
All in all, while TV causes an overall degradation of the brain, continuous use of the internet results in lateral movement, from being able to do a singular task very well to being able to do multiple things all at once. Whether this is a bad thing or not is an exercise left to the reader. I personally think that though a jack of all trades is master at none, it's important to at least have both vast but shallow knowledge, and one specific field of expertise. In effect, being able to do one thing really well, and being able to do many things but medially, are both important mental skills to hone and maintain.
Not at all. I hear Larry's pretty happy about the outcome actually.
Why they would want to send it back would be completely baffling.
According to some guy up top, he just got spit on a whole bunch of times. Nothing to see here. Move along...
And even that should be placed after the credits at the very end.
To people sufficiently angered by this, they simply won't buy it.
I say keep it up. Maybe when it get real bad, it will drive people to start reading again.
Everyone here that posts has an agenda to put forward.
Certainly, but some are more forthright about it than others, allowing readers to compensate for the bias. To not do so is just plain dishonest, and generally frowned upon--at least in the society to which I belong.
You must be really new here.
This is par for the course. In fact, it's better than usual. Had this exact same story appeared a few years ago, there would've already been beard jokes, free as in beer jokes, GPL v3 jokes, and a whole conversation consisting of nothing but puns.
It's not "Russian." It's merely a product of a lack of regulation, oversight, and accountability. The only saving grace for this instance is that the fatal flaws unfortunately appeared before they could sell any.
Or, for that matter, if you have dirty power coming out of your main line, you'd only really need a power cleaner in one location for one group of machines.
A bit of exercise, and serious portion control goes a long way.
For example, instead of eating a small bag of chips every night, eat a big bag of chips (but not party-sized) once a week. Instead of eating all of the meat on a plate served to you at a restaurant, eat half of it and bag the other half for lunch the next day. Have a glass of juice or water instead of a soft drink.
For exercising, going out for a walk every day for about 30 minutes is more than sufficient for most people. A sport is great, but rarely absolutely necessary. A competitive sport can do more harm than good.
There's no need to jump through hoops or eat bad-tasting stuff. Even small changes make a big difference. Now, some people need the heavy exercise and the restrictive diet. But those are rarer than you'd think. Also, stay far, far away from the corn-derived products. That includes everything from corn oil to corn starch to ketchup and mustard to soft drinks.
In general, for people actually doing real work on their computers instead of browsing the web or watching TV or movies, the lower the aspect ratio and the higher the dot pitch, the better. Actually, browsing the web benefits with a lower aspect ratio too, so it's really only watching TV and movies where the high aspect ratio screens are relevant.
It has already been mentioned below, but bears mentioning again that the keyboard mechanics and the key layout are fairly important for developers too. Chiclet keyboards absolutely suck for heavy touch typing. Having a backlight on the keyboard is useful.
Developers are extremely text I/O heavy, unlike regular users who tend to be more output-oriented. For a developer, there is both a need to be able to input text efficiently and effectively, and process text output quickly and precisely.
On the other hand, things that are not as important to developers are refresh rates, color accuracy, and viewing angles. Optical drives, card readers, these can all be replaced by an extra USB port. Having the fastest CPU also is not a must, though it's a bonus. Size is also not nearly as important, though too big is not good, and too small is probably a bit difficult to achieve cost-effectively. But screen size is a non-factor if the dot pitch is small enough.
Those are the things that kill 99.999% of Americans.
DHMO is also a prolific killer. And, it's everywhere.
More often than not, the truth is dirty.
For the idealistic and naive, it's abhorring. For the realistic, it's how things get done.
Despite what they say of age and cynicism, there are more idealistic and naive people out there. At the least, there are plenty of people willing to feign outrage for an ulterior motive and often less savory outcome. Just look at U.S. politics these days.
It certainly knows.
It knows, but you don't. You don't because you haven't measured it yet. And until you measure it, the answer is not the simplified version of the cat being dead and alive at the same time, but that there's a probability it's dead, and a probability it's alive, but it'll never be more than probability until you actually confirm it. Once you confirm it by measurement, the probability of one state goes to one, and the probability of the other state goes to zero.
This goes back to the age-old question: If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? It certainly makes a noise, but does it make a sound?
If there's nothing to observe reality, does it still exist? That's the essence of Schrodinger's cat.
Yeah, guess what that got her...
Almost killed by the people "protecting" her, that's what.
She's learning the hard way not to trust supposed authority figures. It's a lesson we all eventually learn, just some of us learn it earlier, or at least with less on the line.
It's not to say that all authority figures should be disregarded, but that there are more stupid people than smart ones, and that relationship holds equally true for those claiming or given authority.
The sad part is, this might actually describe how it will happen.
Yeah, but spending money to wage war while not raising any taxes to fund it is not exactly sound either, and you're really skirting the point.
Besides, your $2 trillion over 10 years, assuming that it is an accurate number (I've heard bigger numbers), is still nothing to sniff at. At the very least, it would've put us one year and change of deficit less than where we are now.
So the question is, are you supporting fighting a war while cutting taxes? Or are you just nit picking on GP's numbers having nothing else of relevancy to say?
He's willing to make deals with strange bedfellows though
What's wrong with that?
Actually, what happens a lot is that Google employees leave Google to establish their own start up that's based on some new idea. After a while, if they're successful, Google buys them back up.
In this way, Google gets to keep the idea but minimize the risk of putting out a product based on the idea.
Does that imply Xerox is the new Google, or is that just wishful thinking?
Considering this is /. and nobody actually writes any of these stories (except for the occasional self-promoter/slashvertisement), all he really has to do to qualify as a shill is to submit others' stories with such a bias.
E.g. if he submits plenty of Google stories, but all of them are negative, while there've been a ton of positive news coming out of Google at the same time, that's sufficient to qualify as an anti-Google shill.
In this case, this particular submitted appears to be primarily submitting stories that cast everyone except apple in a negative light, with particular focus on all of Apple's major competitors, while submitting only positive stories about Apple. It's just naivete to think that this person is merely "focusing" on Apple. If all those other negative submissions didn't clue you in to that particular bit, I'm not sure you deserve your interesting moderation (but that's the moderators' fault).
It's fairly obvious based on the pattern of accepted stories somebody's propping Apple up while gunning for everybody else. Now, you can argue that perhaps certain editors are biased in the stories they accept, or perhaps the entire editorial staff has become biased. But there's no evidence of that (yet). The list is applicable onto to this particular user, and certainly cannot be extrapolated to represent the entire editorial staff.
Now, it's not wrong to be biased. It's just not journalism. Not that this site has a great track record of journalistic integrity, but knowing that someone is a shill is still better than not.
"This case here is like a carburetor..."
Are you trying to imply that Java is old and busted?
The stop-and-go style is primarily the cause of the injuries. The stop allows teams to reset so that they can line up directly facing each other. It gives the players a moment of rest. It allows them to put all of their energy into each moment of action.
The same thing is the reason for football's popularity. Brief moments of action followed by short periods of rest is the ideal for every form of entertainment (see how movies and TV shows are cut). Too much action and the spectator gets tired and starts to shut down after a while. Too little and the spectator gets bored.