If you were smart like me, you'd know that the standard error in the test is not relevant in this story because both the high scoring group and the lower scoring group are both subject to the same margin of error. Duh.
Having said that, if I test 2 or 3 points higher than someone, I don't consider myself to be smarter than that person. I'd say that we were both in the same general range. And to say that 2 or 3 IQ points is the difference between an A and a B is ridiculous on its face.
Why don't these researchers use their time and money trying to solve important problems, such as how to build a spaceship that will hold the world's fundamentalist Muslems and send them to Alpha Centauri.
It's interesting to hear people complain about their privacy when they don't understand the law. Some of them don't understand what privacy is.
If the subject of the photograph has no reasonable expectation of privacy, then no invasion of privacy is possible. Photographs taken in public places generally are not actionable. Photos of crimes, arrests and accidents usually are considered newsworthy and immune from privacy claims.
There are exceptions. You can't photograph someone standing in the street and run a caption with the photo that says: "Wanted terrorist seen leaving his house" if the person in the photo is just some guy going to get a pack of cigarettes. And you can't photograph Barney Jones waiting for a bus and then use the photo in an ad that says, "Barney Jones drinks new Fizzo Soda and you should, too."
When you are outside, you don't have the right to privacy. If someone is taking a photo of the street, and you're standing in front of a window that doesn't have any blinds or curtains, you don't have any right to privacy. If you want privacy, draw the blinds.
How anyone can construe a photograph of a cat in a window as being an invasion of privacy is totally beyond me. I read her comments ("You can even see that it's a tabby.") I don't know when animals were granted the right to privacy in photographs or how photographing a cat somehow violates the owner's imagined right to privacy. This sort of thing shows ignorance on the part of the woman and also on the part of the media (this is hardly surprising). Perhaps this person just wants to be famous.
I think that Nikko is onto something here but I would like to expand on his idea a bit. What about creating a domain called.stupid? It would be a domain that could only contains sites where people would post stupid ideas and other people could laugh at them. It would cost $10,000 a year for a.stupid site, and all the proceeds would go to me.
"DMCA architect Bruce Lehman has admitted that "our Clinton administration policies didn't work out very well" and "our attempts at copyright control have not been successful". Speaking at conference in Montreal, Lehman lay much of the blame at the feet of the Clinton administration and me."
Funny how the great minds of science are only now realizing what Eastern Philosphy has known for ages:
"The manifold evolving universe arises from the mixing of the one Reality and 'Nothing.' It springs out of 'Nothing' when this 'Nothing' is taken against the background of the one Reality...It is an outcome of 'Nothing' and is nothing. It only seems to have existence. Its apparent existence is due to the one Reality which is, as it were, behind "Nothing." When 'Nothing' is added to the one Reality, the result is the manifold and evolving universe."
- Meher Baba, Discourses (first published in the late 1930's)
You can use a software program to remove the DRM from iTunes files. Or you can just burn them onto a re-recordable CDR and then rip them back onto your HD. You can then re-use the CDR.
Television is so bad, especially network television, that I don't see why anyone would want to watch it at all.
The real question isn't where and how you're going to watch TV. The question is why you want to watch TV in the first place.
Go read a book, or go outside and do something. Use your mind. Life's too short to spend it sucking at the glass teat.
The idea that using technical computer jargon is the same as using ridiculous corporate euphemisms bespeaks a a lack of understanding.
Corporatespeak is used where there are already perfectly clear and adequate words available. They're used for a variety of reasons, none of them good. Just what the hell are "Human Resources" anyway? It reminds me of Soylent Green.
Technical jargon might be unitelligible to the lay person, but it is descriptive, that is, it has meaning. TCP/IP means TCP/IP, a router is a router, it's not a stupid euphemism for something else. I don't understand the names of the tools that a doctor uses, but that's not because doctors call scalpels "portable epidermal biforcators," it's because I'm not a doctor. Likewise, I don't know all the names of parts of an airplane, because I'm not a pilot or a aircraft mechanic.
Do you see the difference? One is language that is deliberately manipulated to create an in crowd and for public relations purposes, and the other is jargon that's not understood by someone who doesn't do that type of work. You can't equate the two.
I think it's important to provide kids in underpriveleged countries, like Nigeria, with cheap laptops so they can learn how to do 419 scams at an early age. The money stolen from Americans and Europeans can only help the local economies.
You scoff, but one day you will all own one of these wrist computers! They will help you plot the course of your jetpacks and flying cars. They will have a force field that will protect you from cosmic rays and all hostile alien life forms.
Slashdot Mirror
If you were smart like me, you'd know that the standard error in the test is not relevant in this story because both the high scoring group and the lower scoring group are both subject to the same margin of error. Duh.
Having said that, if I test 2 or 3 points higher than someone, I don't consider myself to be smarter than that person. I'd say that we were both in the same general range. And to say that 2 or 3 IQ points is the difference between an A and a B is ridiculous on its face.
Why don't these researchers use their time and money trying to solve important problems, such as how to build a spaceship that will hold the world's fundamentalist Muslems and send them to Alpha Centauri.
There are exceptions. You can't photograph someone standing in the street and run a caption with the photo that says: "Wanted terrorist seen leaving his house" if the person in the photo is just some guy going to get a pack of cigarettes. And you can't photograph Barney Jones waiting for a bus and then use the photo in an ad that says, "Barney Jones drinks new Fizzo Soda and you should, too."When you are outside, you don't have the right to privacy. If someone is taking a photo of the street, and you're standing in front of a window that doesn't have any blinds or curtains, you don't have any right to privacy. If you want privacy, draw the blinds.
How anyone can construe a photograph of a cat in a window as being an invasion of privacy is totally beyond me. I read her comments ("You can even see that it's a tabby.") I don't know when animals were granted the right to privacy in photographs or how photographing a cat somehow violates the owner's imagined right to privacy. This sort of thing shows ignorance on the part of the woman and also on the part of the media (this is hardly surprising). Perhaps this person just wants to be famous.
I think that Nikko is onto something here but I would like to expand on his idea a bit. What about creating a domain called .stupid? It would be a domain that could only contains sites where people would post stupid ideas and other people could laugh at them. It would cost $10,000 a year for a .stupid site, and all the proceeds would go to me.
- Meher Baba, Discourses (first published in the late 1930's)
http://www.meherbaba.com/
You can use a software program to remove the DRM from iTunes files. Or you can just burn them onto a re-recordable CDR and then rip them back onto your HD. You can then re-use the CDR.
Television is so bad, especially network television, that I don't see why anyone would want to watch it at all. The real question isn't where and how you're going to watch TV. The question is why you want to watch TV in the first place. Go read a book, or go outside and do something. Use your mind. Life's too short to spend it sucking at the glass teat.
The idea that using technical computer jargon is the same as using ridiculous corporate euphemisms bespeaks a a lack of understanding.
Corporatespeak is used where there are already perfectly clear and adequate words available. They're used for a variety of reasons, none of them good. Just what the hell are "Human Resources" anyway? It reminds me of Soylent Green.
Technical jargon might be unitelligible to the lay person, but it is descriptive, that is, it has meaning. TCP/IP means TCP/IP, a router is a router, it's not a stupid euphemism for something else. I don't understand the names of the tools that a doctor uses, but that's not because doctors call scalpels "portable epidermal biforcators," it's because I'm not a doctor. Likewise, I don't know all the names of parts of an airplane, because I'm not a pilot or a aircraft mechanic.
Do you see the difference? One is language that is deliberately manipulated to create an in crowd and for public relations purposes, and the other is jargon that's not understood by someone who doesn't do that type of work. You can't equate the two.
I think it's important to provide kids in underpriveleged countries, like Nigeria, with cheap laptops so they can learn how to do 419 scams at an early age. The money stolen from Americans and Europeans can only help the local economies.
You scoff, but one day you will all own one of these wrist computers! They will help you plot the course of your jetpacks and flying cars. They will have a force field that will protect you from cosmic rays and all hostile alien life forms.