Well, I was there too, and apparently you missed the times when he took out the fold-able crossbow by accident instead of the laptop, or when he mistakenly displayed his 3D map of the latest jungle coordinates for a few seconds before the slide moved on field equations. I also once saw him go home on a pterodactyl when oil prices were uncomfortable.
That's well known - what is not so well known is that this release of go-to-sleep chemicals is probably an evolutionary advantage that developed to allow the first ejaculation (higher sperm count) to impregnate the female, because further intercourse can lead to the sperm to be removed with the thrusts. Sex feels good to encourage reproduction, but it needs to be "regulated" for the benefit of reproduction. Hence your boner is the first thing that goes after intercourse. In fact, this think-of-the-semen business is pretty serious.. some promiscuous gorilla species have specially adapted dicks to help them remove the previous male's sperm, thereby increasing their own chances.
Ties in nicely with the release of more prolactin during intercourse than masturbation. How the automatic hormonal release actually knows/communicates with the sentient cortex (to recognize the difference)is more interesting. It is possible that we think about sex differently during masturbation. I certainly do(less dominance/nothing to dominate).
There are enough anatomical details for the female reproductive system to provide a complete and scalable solution to this problem. Stop acting like you're new here, dammit:)
Ok, but to clarify for some readers, "particle" does not mean corpuscular like a tennis ball, which is why the term "particle" tends to be a little misleading. In fact, it is why any "it's like a " phrase tends to fail, and why it was such a shock to discover indeterminable states to begin with. Quantum theory rests on the (unsurprising) revelation that at small scales, things are not as we have always visualized in the large, solid man-world. I don't think anyone other than Bohr was comfortable at the time with *any* explanation of some of these phenomena, even with models that were so fucking accurate.
But it is easier to think of the quantized light in terms of... quanta! New particles, now with many new features and a money back guarantee! Happy Independence Day!
We could do a little more than file a bug. We could file a lawsuit, since apparently that's how the game is being played. Of course, they could be keeping IP logs separate from the user account system, but that is another issue.
Some judges are just clueless. Turning over IP data and ALL client logs is outrageous - Orwellian even. I only grant access to Youtube, per license agreement, to use my data within the (reasonable) privacy limits set. I do not grant access to the whole fucking world to know my personal information, under the pretense of the POSSIBILITY that this info could reveal me to be a "viewer" of "illegal" material. That idea - that I MAY be violating some obscure law - is what I call speculation.
I'm going to send this judge an email, if he has one. I don't want my facebook page (and the marketable data therein) to be released to Corporation X, next.
Well, it always used to be some form of practicality/performance argument, though good ole Tannenbaum has a decent rundown (and refutation) of all of those claims on his website. And you could always ask Linus why he hated MINIX so much. I'm sure he had his reasons. Personally, I'm using windows despite having many laptops partitioned into a variety of wonderful dist flavors, so I'll just be quiet for my safety I guess.
Something about property taxes having low ceilings in Cali, apparently. I'm there now by the way and have no idea what the OP was talking about concerning "bad weather" and "quality of life". There are more luxury cars, amazing outdoor spaces, great places to go/things to do, and generally happier people here than almost anywhere I've seen in the US. Is OP on crack? Been here since may, and the views you get even on the way to work are breathtaking. The weather is great pretty much all year round. I'm pretty sure the folks moving to Seattle are not doing it because washington state is a better place to be than the Bay.
Well said. It is very important for people to think very carefully and without emotion about this topic in order to realize that this "free will" business is, by definition, illusory.
"How many tyrants, rapists and murderers will we kill in that quest?..a good or smart person is not in the slightest bit guaranteed."
That is irrelevant, because I did not say that a good or smart person is more likely to be physically defective. Please see my reply to the other poster.
"The argument is as invalid as one which holds that people shouldn't reproduce because they might create the next Stalin or serial killer."
No, that is what you were suggesting was equivalent. It is not equivalent, because people are innocent until proven guilty (in court) and in general we give human beings the benefit of the doubt. You dont look at your child's cradle with the view that they can be a mass murderer just as easily as a scientist or just a Good Person (TM). Even if the probability that the "possibly defective in the future" human will be criminal is exactly the same as his/her chance at being someone great, most people will agree we should not act on the probability alone. He/she does not not become a criminal until proven to be so, whereas we are prepared to accept someone in society even if they DONT turn out to be great.
I am apparently being modded down by people who think I am backing a pro-life stance for the reason I gave. That is not the case. I am only saying that I would rather not do anything that can a. take away future great minds and equally b. take away future criminal minds
and rather deal with the consequences of the evil ones.
The point was that people who may have signs of physical inferiority can have other advantages/abilities that dont show up on the radar. We will never know what people's minds turn out to be, even if at some futuristic stage we can spot biological signs of higher-than-average intelligence. I'm pretty sure stephen hawkins would have been evaluated as a complete "abort-case", a virtual disaster, if he was put through the system. He is just an example. There are many others who may be susceptible to some disease, but they only contract it later in life, after they have lived wonderful times and after they have done amazing things.
As for the hitler e.g, that is completely unrelated to my point as you now can see. Also, it's like walking into the street and randomly shooting children in the hope that probability distributions allow one of them to be a mass murderer. The reliance on the possibility of removing a person who "turns out" (very little to do with genetics) to be evil, in order to feel ok about denying many others a rewarding life, is just not cool.
The current tech may show which people are physically more viable to contract a disease/illness, but what about human minds? How many Stephen Hawkins are people going to kill in the quest for perfection?
People should have the right to do anything within the limits of their personal freedom, and government should shut up. That is not the issue (hopefully we are all educated people who agree). The problem is whether people should actually go ahead and use those rights, and under what circumstances. The worst thing you can do to mankind is deprive it of a great mind.
This is the problem with people who don't know how to appreciate C++ capabilities. Do you even know why a "virtual" declaration on a method may be useful, or what it does internally? The whole idea is that you write code that can call methods named in a base class but defined in a derivative (child), via pointers. So, if you want to keep your code clean, you just have one line like:
Parent *p = new Child();
and the rest of the "user" code stays the same. You change the one line above to change functionality of every virtual method.
Now since destructors are called implicitly most of the time, and since you OBVIOUSLY DECLARED VIRTUAL METHODS FOR A REASON, the compiler will warn you if the destructor is not virtual too, because then the object will be destructed as if it is a Parent object. It is a very valid warning, and will save you memory leaks(child objects contain more stuff to be freed..etc). It all makes sense now, see. The compiler is being nice, yes? Do you not agree that you should be blushing, after accusing the heavenly father Stroustrup of psychosis?
Advice for life in general: If you don't know how to use something, don't use it;)
Off topic: Kingship is not like property. Property can be bought and sold, the individual's economic means enables them to maintain ownership. The individual's economic means, in turn, are determined (in a free society) by several factors related to the physical and mental capabilities with which they have been endowed by nature, or (as you imply) the simple material benefits bestowed by their parents. Either way, the receiver has little say in the matter, and life is not fair. Those who are willing to exert effort to utilize their natural abilities/luck/circumstances will usually do better, hence free society's greatest "properties" belong to people who did not have them to begin with.
Kingship is different - revolution and conquest are how things change hands. They are not the norm. Property was made for, and is inevitably involved in, daily exchange.
Free society can be beautiful. Communism always sucks.
Possibly: what exactly the research on self-awareness/sentient learning systems comprises for you guys. The reason I bring this up is that I left AI as a main research field because even the most flexible research goals set by academia today are just tiny steps of applicative advances in statistical inference and mathematical techniques in general. Not that these things are not useful (machine learning is quite amazing, actually) but the initial goals have little to do with all this. We have surpassed brains in many ways, but the massively parallel brain does not even "learn", let alone think(which is what we want) in the manner in which any AI system today is based. And yes, that includes adaptive ones that change their own set of heuristics.
I spent a lot of my time thinking about neuroscience and reading psychology , and while I slowly moved towards rationalizing certain things, the main obstacles to what I needed to know were deeply biological. How exactly does the mind "light up" certain areas of memory while recalling things (sounds, sights..etc) stored nearby? How "randomized" is this? And how can it be represented mathematically (von neumann architecture)? Is there ANYTHING we do that is not entirely memory based (even arithmetic seems to stem from adaptive memory)? Why do we need to sleep, and what part of the whole "algorithm", if there is one, is dependent on this sleeping business? What exactly does it change in our reasoning?
If we know precisely some good answers, rather than the guesswork in literally all major texbooks, we can begin to model something useful and perhaps introduce much more powerful intelligence with all we have developed in NN, probabilistic systems..etc. I think once sentience is conquered, human beings are going to be immediately made inferior. It's just this abstraction business that is so damn complicated.
I'm just starting to figure out this technique myself. I'm 23, and a recovering nice guy.. I love slashdot. I have been laughing so hard at this thread today, I think I broke some bones. Amazing number of head-nodding comments and yeah-hes-right-you-should-kiss-her replies all over the place. Inspirational stories about guys who became badass. Suggestions on what to say in bed. Deep philosophical discussions on the nature of third-wave feminism and how it relates to what you should say in bed.
ARE YOU PEOPLE LISTENING TO YOURSELVES?
Your post is great, actually, but I dont agree it has to do with being nice. I think you just became more confident. Its not a "technique".
Please lets get back to our browser war discussions before the women reading slashdot take notice and decide that we really arent a good idea after all.
Mod parent up. It's always the most clueless people who are willing to give the "this is how it's done" speeches.
To the GP: quit being an asshole. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Girls with character, intelligence and a sense of humor always think they're going to be screwed in the elevator? You sound like you are 16 at most.
Occasionally, I really get to wondering how you people end up on slashdot. I used to think geeks generally had some common sense at least, as a prequisite for being able to do something technical. You crackheads prove me wrong - very violently - every time.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I was there too, and apparently you missed the times when he took out the fold-able crossbow by accident instead of the laptop, or when he mistakenly displayed his 3D map of the latest jungle coordinates for a few seconds before the slide moved on field equations. I also once saw him go home on a pterodactyl when oil prices were uncomfortable.
PS: pterodactyl's are pterosaurs, not dinosaurs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pterodactyl
That's well known - what is not so well known is that this release of go-to-sleep chemicals is probably an evolutionary advantage that developed to allow the first ejaculation (higher sperm count) to impregnate the female, because further intercourse can lead to the sperm to be removed with the thrusts. Sex feels good to encourage reproduction, but it needs to be "regulated" for the benefit of reproduction. Hence your boner is the first thing that goes after intercourse. In fact, this think-of-the-semen business is pretty serious.. some promiscuous gorilla species have specially adapted dicks to help them remove the previous male's sperm, thereby increasing their own chances.
Ties in nicely with the release of more prolactin during intercourse than masturbation. How the automatic hormonal release actually knows/communicates with the sentient cortex (to recognize the difference)is more interesting. It is possible that we think about sex differently during masturbation. I certainly do(less dominance/nothing to dominate).
Yeah, I've never had a problem with my rou
You know what, those jokes are fucking la
Just because your folders disappeared doesn't mean you actually deleted them. Jeeze.
And mucking about with Reiser[FS] doesn't seem to appeal to anyone right now.
There are enough anatomical details for the female reproductive system to provide a complete and scalable solution to this problem. Stop acting like you're new here, dammit :)
Ok, but to clarify for some readers, "particle" does not mean corpuscular like a tennis ball, which is why the term "particle" tends to be a little misleading. In fact, it is why any "it's like a " phrase tends to fail, and why it was such a shock to discover indeterminable states to begin with. Quantum theory rests on the (unsurprising) revelation that at small scales, things are not as we have always visualized in the large, solid man-world. I don't think anyone other than Bohr was comfortable at the time with *any* explanation of some of these phenomena, even with models that were so fucking accurate.
And light does travel in wave form. Pics from a slashdot story very short while ago:
http://technology.newscientist.com/article/dn14172-fastestever-flashgun-captures-image-of-light-wave.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news1_head_dn14172
But it is easier to think of the quantized light in terms of... quanta! New particles, now with many new features and a money back guarantee!
Happy Independence Day!
Hopefully Google will print out the information, one record per page, single sided, on heavy card stock,
Given that the judge was born in 1927, I don't think he should find it unreasonable if they did that (okay, maybe not heavy card stock).
http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2274
We could do a little more than file a bug. We could file a lawsuit, since apparently that's how the game is being played. Of course, they could be keeping IP logs separate from the user account system, but that is another issue.
Some judges are just clueless. Turning over IP data and ALL client logs is outrageous - Orwellian even. I only grant access to Youtube, per license agreement, to use my data within the (reasonable) privacy limits set. I do not grant access to the whole fucking world to know my personal information, under the pretense of the POSSIBILITY that this info could reveal me to be a "viewer" of "illegal" material. That idea - that I MAY be violating some obscure law - is what I call speculation.
I'm going to send this judge an email, if he has one. I don't want my facebook page (and the marketable data therein) to be released to Corporation X, next.
Well, it always used to be some form of practicality/performance argument, though good ole Tannenbaum has a decent rundown (and refutation) of all of those claims on his website. And you could always ask Linus why he hated MINIX so much. I'm sure he had his reasons. Personally, I'm using windows despite having many laptops partitioned into a variety of wonderful dist flavors, so I'll just be quiet for my safety I guess.
This could be a great start to the modular vs. monolithic kernel debate! Where is Tannenbaum when you need him :(
Something about property taxes having low ceilings in Cali, apparently. I'm there now by the way and have no idea what the OP was talking about concerning "bad weather" and "quality of life". There are more luxury cars, amazing outdoor spaces, great places to go/things to do, and generally happier people here than almost anywhere I've seen in the US. Is OP on crack? Been here since may, and the views you get even on the way to work are breathtaking. The weather is great pretty much all year round. I'm pretty sure the folks moving to Seattle are not doing it because washington state is a better place to be than the Bay.
Well said. It is very important for people to think very carefully and without emotion about this topic in order to realize that this "free will" business is, by definition, illusory.
No, what gave you that idea? That would be a stupid thing to say. Please go read my other responses to other replies.
"How many tyrants, rapists and murderers will we kill in that quest?..a good or smart person is not in the slightest bit guaranteed."
That is irrelevant, because I did not say that a good or smart person is more likely to be physically defective. Please see my reply to the other poster.
"The argument is as invalid as one which holds that people shouldn't reproduce because they might create the next Stalin or serial killer."
No, that is what you were suggesting was equivalent. It is not equivalent, because people are innocent until proven guilty (in court) and in general we give human beings the benefit of the doubt. You dont look at your child's cradle with the view that they can be a mass murderer just as easily as a scientist or just a Good Person (TM). Even if the probability that the "possibly defective in the future" human will be criminal is exactly the same as his/her chance at being someone great, most people will agree we should not act on the probability alone. He/she does not not become a criminal until proven to be so, whereas we are prepared to accept someone in society even if they DONT turn out to be great.
I am apparently being modded down by people who think I am backing a pro-life stance for the reason I gave. That is not the case. I am only saying that I would rather not do anything that can
a. take away future great minds
and equally
b. take away future criminal minds
and rather deal with the consequences of the evil ones.
The point was that people who may have signs of physical inferiority can have other advantages/abilities that dont show up on the radar. We will never know what people's minds turn out to be, even if at some futuristic stage we can spot biological signs of higher-than-average intelligence. I'm pretty sure stephen hawkins would have been evaluated as a complete "abort-case", a virtual disaster, if he was put through the system. He is just an example. There are many others who may be susceptible to some disease, but they only contract it later in life, after they have lived wonderful times and after they have done amazing things.
As for the hitler e.g, that is completely unrelated to my point as you now can see. Also, it's like walking into the street and randomly shooting children in the hope that probability distributions allow one of them to be a mass murderer. The reliance on the possibility of removing a person who "turns out" (very little to do with genetics) to be evil, in order to feel ok about denying many others a rewarding life, is just not cool.
The current tech may show which people are physically more viable to contract a disease/illness, but what about human minds? How many Stephen Hawkins are people going to kill in the quest for perfection?
People should have the right to do anything within the limits of their personal freedom, and government should shut up. That is not the issue (hopefully we are all educated people who agree). The problem is whether people should actually go ahead and use those rights, and under what circumstances. The worst thing you can do to mankind is deprive it of a great mind.
Oh yeah? Well all I have to do is let the butterfly in my hand flap it's wings once, and you know the rest.
This is the problem with people who don't know how to appreciate C++ capabilities. Do you even know why a "virtual" declaration on a method may be useful, or what it does internally? The whole idea is that you write code that can call methods named in a base class but defined in a derivative (child), via pointers. So, if you want to keep your code clean, you just have one line like:
Parent *p = new Child();
and the rest of the "user" code stays the same. You change the one line above to change functionality of every virtual method.
Now since destructors are called implicitly most of the time, and since you OBVIOUSLY DECLARED VIRTUAL METHODS FOR A REASON, the compiler will warn you if the destructor is not virtual too, because then the object will be destructed as if it is a Parent object. It is a very valid warning, and will save you memory leaks(child objects contain more stuff to be freed..etc). It all makes sense now, see. The compiler is being nice, yes? Do you not agree that you should be blushing, after accusing the heavenly father Stroustrup of psychosis?
Advice for life in general: If you don't know how to use something, don't use it ;)
Off topic: Kingship is not like property. Property can be bought and sold, the individual's economic means enables them to maintain ownership. The individual's economic means, in turn, are determined (in a free society) by several factors related to the physical and mental capabilities with which they have been endowed by nature, or (as you imply) the simple material benefits bestowed by their parents. Either way, the receiver has little say in the matter, and life is not fair. Those who are willing to exert effort to utilize their natural abilities/luck/circumstances will usually do better, hence free society's greatest "properties" belong to people who did not have them to begin with.
Kingship is different - revolution and conquest are how things change hands. They are not the norm. Property was made for, and is inevitably involved in, daily exchange.
Free society can be beautiful.
Communism always sucks.
Possibly: what exactly the research on self-awareness/sentient learning systems comprises for you guys. The reason I bring this up is that I left AI as a main research field because even the most flexible research goals set by academia today are just tiny steps of applicative advances in statistical inference and mathematical techniques in general. Not that these things are not useful (machine learning is quite amazing, actually) but the initial goals have little to do with all this. We have surpassed brains in many ways, but the massively parallel brain does not even "learn", let alone think(which is what we want) in the manner in which any AI system today is based. And yes, that includes adaptive ones that change their own set of heuristics.
I spent a lot of my time thinking about neuroscience and reading psychology , and while I slowly moved towards rationalizing certain things, the main obstacles to what I needed to know were deeply biological. How exactly does the mind "light up" certain areas of memory while recalling things (sounds, sights..etc) stored nearby? How "randomized" is this? And how can it be represented mathematically (von neumann architecture)? Is there ANYTHING we do that is not entirely memory based (even arithmetic seems to stem from adaptive memory)? Why do we need to sleep, and what part of the whole "algorithm", if there is one, is dependent on this sleeping business? What exactly does it change in our reasoning?
If we know precisely some good answers, rather than the guesswork in literally all major texbooks, we can begin to model something useful and perhaps introduce much more powerful intelligence with all we have developed in NN, probabilistic systems..etc. I think once sentience is conquered, human beings are going to be immediately made inferior. It's just this abstraction business that is so damn complicated.
High UID, perhaps?
You too? I thought I was singlehandedly saving the world! I think we should start a club. We'll call it the Savings Clu..
Uh, have a great day!
ARE YOU PEOPLE LISTENING TO YOURSELVES?
Your post is great, actually, but I dont agree it has to do with being nice. I think you just became more confident. Its not a "technique".
Please lets get back to our browser war discussions before the women reading slashdot take notice and decide that we really arent a good idea after all.
Mod parent up. It's always the most clueless people who are willing to give the "this is how it's done" speeches.
To the GP: quit being an asshole. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Girls with character, intelligence and a sense of humor always think they're going to be screwed in the elevator? You sound like you are 16 at most.
Occasionally, I really get to wondering how you people end up on slashdot. I used to think geeks generally had some common sense at least, as a prequisite for being able to do something technical. You crackheads prove me wrong - very violently - every time.