For example, if you're from a culture where people expect you to have high IQ score it is more likely that you'll discover that the fish is always 72 inches, because the people who write the tests don't enjoy algebra and they all copy the same word problem. POW! Unless you're already scoring in the 99th percentile, your IQ went up. And if your IQ is in the 99th percentile, I just lowered your relative score by increasing the IQ of a few random credulous idiots.
Another, if you regularly engage in word games in English-language newspapers you'll be more familiar with re-ordering the letters in words, and you'll already have exposure to word games that make use of the English spellings of the capital cities of certain cities with spellings convenient for use in the test. Those are the same cities with spellings convenient for use in newspaper word games. And yet, playing crossword puzzles doesn't make you smarter. If anything it makes you stupider; just look at the "answers" they come up with for their "questions!"
Also, some cultures expose children to number sequence games in school, while other cultures focus on practical applications of math. The number patterns give an advantage to people who have seen the same sequences in the past, even if they don't "remember" them. In general intelligence the need is to pick out the pattern that has relevance to a context, so having the relevant context of a game is very important to if this "skill" is developed in the abstract or not. And context-free numerical pattern matching has dubious (potentially negative) utility in most fields.
That's the part I'm wondering. Maybe somebody willing to read the article can tell me. The summary says, "this ability is not associated with individuals' general intelligence, or IQ."
My question in, since when the fuck did anybody invent a useful test of general intelligence?! That is a way more exceptional claim than there being a lack of correlation between IQ and visual object memory.
I'd also be a lot more interested in visual classification vs IQ than visual object memory. Especially if the click-line is going to say "visual skills."
Generally, they know they can use his code because he has waived his right to sue them by purporting to give them permission by placing it in the public domain.
Lawyers (IANAL) disagree over if it is possible/legit to actually place a work in the public domain, but both sides agree that if you try you're waiving your right to sue people over it.
The problem is if the people who say it isn't legit are correct, and then you die and the person who inherits the copyright sells it, and no restrictions attach to the buyer and now they can sue you over it! Hopefully, the other lawyers are right and it really would be public domain.
This is why I just use the Apache 2 license, then all the different "camps" can use it, and all their lawyers are happy.
"Liberal Arts" means they tried to teach you to read, in addition to teaching you a trade.
I take it you're very proud of your trade school degree, and consider it to be more valuable than a science degree from a Liberal Arts institution, right? Right? You're not just an idiot who couldn't learn the words??!
If you're sending the same number of people either way, and the number of people being sent is not set up to automatically scale to their productivity, then the difference in cost is $0.
Whereas most of the people on the ground work at jobs where if they got less work done, it would translate into more total hours of work their employer would have to pay for.
My State votes on paper in human-readable form and then uses computers to tabulate it. It works really well, you can have people from both parties standing there watching the ballots feed in and watching the counters go up! And you can re-count by hand. Best of both worlds.
As somebody who has been through the USICS process with a relative I don't think you really capture the situation at all.
An RFE isn't a "challenge." I received an RFE myself. It is what it says it is: a request for additional documentation. The person who decides to send an RFE or not isn't a person who has "reasons," or an "agenda." They are basically a police officer. Their title is Immigration Officer, and their job involves not only investigating the paperwork to see if it is naughty, but also chasing down and arresting people who don't have the right paperwork. This is not some sort of political appointee, these are the same career professionals who were doing the job last year, the year before, the year before. Whatever personal agenda they might have, it isn't changing from year to year.
What changed is a policy, relating to how much paperwork they have to find in the application before approving it. In the past they had instructions not to really investigate the H1B applications in the same way that they process other types of application; now they're applying the same type of evidence standards that other applications require, and are in fact called for in the laws authorizing the H1B program. That's what they're going to do. Naturally, these companies were submitting the least evidence they needed to get approved, because in a "rubber stamp" regulatory environment you don't want to submit extra stuff that might get examined. But as here, when they suddenly switch to the actual system that the law set up, now those applications don't have all the required evidence, and so of course they're going to get RFEs.
If their situation is like mine, and everything is in order the Officer just wanted additional evidence, then they'll have no problem. If in fact their application doesn't meet the standards in the law, and they only even submitted it because they anticipated getting rubber-stamped, then they'll get rejected. Rightfully.
Your idea is silly because it would require there to be a bunch of new appointees running things, but actually that isn't the case. They're not involved in considerations like trying to encourage companies to hire domestic talent; they're concerned with the paperwork involved in documenting the required steps in the law.
These aren't the immigration cops who arrest brown people for being near the border; these are the immigration cops who wake you up at 6am to make sure you're really married and sleeping in the same bed! They don't give a rats ass what color her skin is; most people whose applications they approve are going to have brown skin, because we're on planet Earth.
I don't think you really understood my comment. At all. I explicitly stated that the case in the summary isn't the norm, if you want to use that case to somehow say I'm wrong about my observations, you'd have to start with that; proving that the case in the summary is the norm rather than the exception. Without that, you don't even raise anything, you just show you didn't understand what was said.
Trade Federations are there to extract payments that they declared some party to owe, or to enforce an agreement that some party neglected to sign but will have signed before the Trade Federation leaves orbit.
This is not a shortcoming of the movies, or something learned from Star Wars "books." Don't read that shit, it is drivel. But if you read golden age science fiction, then you instantly understand who the Trade Federation is, and what they want. They're any monopoly that the rule of law doesn't touch; they're the Rockefellers, the East India Trade Companies, the Ubers.
You basically "have to" read Snow Crash if you read sci-fi, it is the modern classic that coined the word "avatar" as used on the internet. So start there even if it isn't his best book.
If you like it, at least half of his books are as good. The other half might be less accessible, so YMMV.
If you do really like it, don't leave out Interface even though it has a co-author who mostly wrote it, because it is really funny given various current events in the world right now. It wasn't written as a comedy.
The only warnings about Stephenson are: Anathem is a cross between sci-fi and philosophy. It is weird. Don't read that first; you'll love it or hate it without regard to how you felt about his other books. The other warning is, read Cryptonomicon before reading The Baroque Cycle they're not exactly a series but they're connected in a certain way.
panicking and just compulsively going over ingredient labels in the pantry
I don't think I ever panicked over it, but gosh yes, I remember those nights at 3am sitting on the kitchen floor reading soup labels... "what am I doing here? What time is it? Was I going to make a snack? Oh yeah, I'm out of books!"
I hate podcasts, but maybe 15% of my reading got replaced with videos.
I spend probably 6 hours a day reading, and I'm not counting slashdot or news/current events.
In the past year I think I read 2 "books," so a per-month number wouldn't have meaning. I read from books frequently. 10 years ago, my answer would have been maybe 10 per month.
Less information is hidden inside expensive books now, there has been a massive democratization of knowledge. Still incomplete, but ongoing! I don't have to buy 6 big books and read through them to find out if they explain what I want to know, I can just learn all the same information on a step-by-step basis based on the questions that I had at the end of the previous step.
You seem to lack comprehension. If they don't provide a usable contact, it wasn't a real scam, it was just a mistake spam.
As regards your past activities, you were part of a distributed effort. You had no information as to the number of people attempting to be spammers, or how many messages they were sending. So you had no way of knowing if your efforts should be expected to decrease the number of spams in your box, or if it would decrease the overall number in a way you can't detect, or if it would slow the rate increase.
It is not really any surprise that when your own lessons learned are lessons based on ignorance you end up with a nihilistic result.
Right, but it is the human scammer who is the point of failure being DoSed. When you say "email DoS" you make it sound like the email system is being DoSed, which would be bad. But that isn't the case.
The ones you can afford euphemistically call themselves escorts, the ones that work for legit escort agencies are actually escorts and do the job in the summary! The most often case isn't impersonating a family member, but impersonating a real date. Usually for a business function.
Slashdot Mirror
For example, if you're from a culture where people expect you to have high IQ score it is more likely that you'll discover that the fish is always 72 inches, because the people who write the tests don't enjoy algebra and they all copy the same word problem. POW! Unless you're already scoring in the 99th percentile, your IQ went up. And if your IQ is in the 99th percentile, I just lowered your relative score by increasing the IQ of a few random credulous idiots.
Another, if you regularly engage in word games in English-language newspapers you'll be more familiar with re-ordering the letters in words, and you'll already have exposure to word games that make use of the English spellings of the capital cities of certain cities with spellings convenient for use in the test. Those are the same cities with spellings convenient for use in newspaper word games. And yet, playing crossword puzzles doesn't make you smarter. If anything it makes you stupider; just look at the "answers" they come up with for their "questions!"
Also, some cultures expose children to number sequence games in school, while other cultures focus on practical applications of math. The number patterns give an advantage to people who have seen the same sequences in the past, even if they don't "remember" them. In general intelligence the need is to pick out the pattern that has relevance to a context, so having the relevant context of a game is very important to if this "skill" is developed in the abstract or not. And context-free numerical pattern matching has dubious (potentially negative) utility in most fields.
That's the part I'm wondering. Maybe somebody willing to read the article can tell me. The summary says, "this ability is not associated with individuals' general intelligence, or IQ."
My question in, since when the fuck did anybody invent a useful test of general intelligence?! That is a way more exceptional claim than there being a lack of correlation between IQ and visual object memory.
I'd also be a lot more interested in visual classification vs IQ than visual object memory. Especially if the click-line is going to say "visual skills."
In his defense, it was at least true up until about 40 years ago. He probably didn't read the newspaper that week and never knew!
Generally, they know they can use his code because he has waived his right to sue them by purporting to give them permission by placing it in the public domain.
Lawyers (IANAL) disagree over if it is possible/legit to actually place a work in the public domain, but both sides agree that if you try you're waiving your right to sue people over it.
The problem is if the people who say it isn't legit are correct, and then you die and the person who inherits the copyright sells it, and no restrictions attach to the buyer and now they can sue you over it! Hopefully, the other lawyers are right and it really would be public domain.
This is why I just use the Apache 2 license, then all the different "camps" can use it, and all their lawyers are happy.
"Liberal Arts" means they tried to teach you to read, in addition to teaching you a trade.
I take it you're very proud of your trade school degree, and consider it to be more valuable than a science degree from a Liberal Arts institution, right? Right? You're not just an idiot who couldn't learn the words??!
Make Pancakes Tennis Again!!!!1@
Everybody with a 4 year degree who didn't attend a "trade school" has a Liberal Arts Degree. That includes all those BS degrees!
"The more you know!"
Liberal Arts means you had to learn how to read in addition to learning math.
If you're sending the same number of people either way, and the number of people being sent is not set up to automatically scale to their productivity, then the difference in cost is $0.
Whereas most of the people on the ground work at jobs where if they got less work done, it would translate into more total hours of work their employer would have to pay for.
Easy, easy calculation! X > 0 T/F
What is Digg? Is that going to be the new slashdot?
3rd. coming out of an ice age it is a safe bet to predict increasing temperature
Golly, if only we had some sort of geologic record to compare! Oh, wait...
My State votes on paper in human-readable form and then uses computers to tabulate it. It works really well, you can have people from both parties standing there watching the ballots feed in and watching the counters go up! And you can re-count by hand. Best of both worlds.
As somebody who has been through the USICS process with a relative I don't think you really capture the situation at all.
An RFE isn't a "challenge." I received an RFE myself. It is what it says it is: a request for additional documentation. The person who decides to send an RFE or not isn't a person who has "reasons," or an "agenda." They are basically a police officer. Their title is Immigration Officer, and their job involves not only investigating the paperwork to see if it is naughty, but also chasing down and arresting people who don't have the right paperwork. This is not some sort of political appointee, these are the same career professionals who were doing the job last year, the year before, the year before. Whatever personal agenda they might have, it isn't changing from year to year.
What changed is a policy, relating to how much paperwork they have to find in the application before approving it. In the past they had instructions not to really investigate the H1B applications in the same way that they process other types of application; now they're applying the same type of evidence standards that other applications require, and are in fact called for in the laws authorizing the H1B program. That's what they're going to do. Naturally, these companies were submitting the least evidence they needed to get approved, because in a "rubber stamp" regulatory environment you don't want to submit extra stuff that might get examined. But as here, when they suddenly switch to the actual system that the law set up, now those applications don't have all the required evidence, and so of course they're going to get RFEs.
If their situation is like mine, and everything is in order the Officer just wanted additional evidence, then they'll have no problem. If in fact their application doesn't meet the standards in the law, and they only even submitted it because they anticipated getting rubber-stamped, then they'll get rejected. Rightfully.
Your idea is silly because it would require there to be a bunch of new appointees running things, but actually that isn't the case. They're not involved in considerations like trying to encourage companies to hire domestic talent; they're concerned with the paperwork involved in documenting the required steps in the law.
These aren't the immigration cops who arrest brown people for being near the border; these are the immigration cops who wake you up at 6am to make sure you're really married and sleeping in the same bed! They don't give a rats ass what color her skin is; most people whose applications they approve are going to have brown skin, because we're on planet Earth.
I don't think you really understood my comment. At all. I explicitly stated that the case in the summary isn't the norm, if you want to use that case to somehow say I'm wrong about my observations, you'd have to start with that; proving that the case in the summary is the norm rather than the exception. Without that, you don't even raise anything, you just show you didn't understand what was said.
Just like your barista is not obligated to give a free biscotti, but if you're a regular it might happen!
What makes you think "obligations" are the source of behaviors, rather than a desire to please the customer and achieve return business?
You'd have to being sold to be "the most expensive human." Probably why he never thought about it; he was never up for sale.
Maybe there is another similar, but slightly different, question they should have asked instead?
Trade Federations are there to extract payments that they declared some party to owe, or to enforce an agreement that some party neglected to sign but will have signed before the Trade Federation leaves orbit.
This is not a shortcoming of the movies, or something learned from Star Wars "books." Don't read that shit, it is drivel. But if you read golden age science fiction, then you instantly understand who the Trade Federation is, and what they want. They're any monopoly that the rule of law doesn't touch; they're the Rockefellers, the East India Trade Companies, the Ubers.
You basically "have to" read Snow Crash if you read sci-fi, it is the modern classic that coined the word "avatar" as used on the internet. So start there even if it isn't his best book.
If you like it, at least half of his books are as good. The other half might be less accessible, so YMMV.
If you do really like it, don't leave out Interface even though it has a co-author who mostly wrote it, because it is really funny given various current events in the world right now. It wasn't written as a comedy.
The only warnings about Stephenson are: Anathem is a cross between sci-fi and philosophy. It is weird. Don't read that first; you'll love it or hate it without regard to how you felt about his other books. The other warning is, read Cryptonomicon before reading The Baroque Cycle they're not exactly a series but they're connected in a certain way.
panicking and just compulsively going over ingredient labels in the pantry
I don't think I ever panicked over it, but gosh yes, I remember those nights at 3am sitting on the kitchen floor reading soup labels... "what am I doing here? What time is it? Was I going to make a snack? Oh yeah, I'm out of books!"
I hate podcasts, but maybe 15% of my reading got replaced with videos.
I spend probably 6 hours a day reading, and I'm not counting slashdot or news/current events.
In the past year I think I read 2 "books," so a per-month number wouldn't have meaning. I read from books frequently. 10 years ago, my answer would have been maybe 10 per month.
Less information is hidden inside expensive books now, there has been a massive democratization of knowledge. Still incomplete, but ongoing! I don't have to buy 6 big books and read through them to find out if they explain what I want to know, I can just learn all the same information on a step-by-step basis based on the questions that I had at the end of the previous step.
You seem to lack comprehension. If they don't provide a usable contact, it wasn't a real scam, it was just a mistake spam.
As regards your past activities, you were part of a distributed effort. You had no information as to the number of people attempting to be spammers, or how many messages they were sending. So you had no way of knowing if your efforts should be expected to decrease the number of spams in your box, or if it would decrease the overall number in a way you can't detect, or if it would slow the rate increase.
It is not really any surprise that when your own lessons learned are lessons based on ignorance you end up with a nihilistic result.
Right, but it is the human scammer who is the point of failure being DoSed. When you say "email DoS" you make it sound like the email system is being DoSed, which would be bad. But that isn't the case.
It may be that figuring out what the email addresses are is not the hard part of scamming.
how do you know they don't send you on to their friends or mark the address as a "known good" address or a "possible sucker" address.
That's a feature, it makes it like a virus!
Where I live these morons get their face on the evening news and then get fired from their jobs.
The ones you can afford euphemistically call themselves escorts, the ones that work for legit escort agencies are actually escorts and do the job in the summary! The most often case isn't impersonating a family member, but impersonating a real date. Usually for a business function.