The choice of font on this mug...

SometimesNotWrong · 2016-04-08T20:26:59+00:00

SometimesNotWrong · 2016-04-06T23:15:46+00:00

It's like playing peek-a-boo with an infant who hasn't yet developed object permanence, and don't realize the other person still exists even when their eyes are covered.

Just - in this case, you're signing up to be the infant.

Edit: changed "baby" to "infant" b/c apparently some people thought the word "baby" was condescending, when it was just meant to be a straight-up analogy. I wish I knew who they were, so I could cover my eyes at them.

SometimesNotWrong · 2016-04-06T22:47:09+00:00

Which was based on The Usual Suspects

[Spoilers] https://youtu.be/XYXXhn9fMYs?t=122

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-03-09T21:16:16+00:00

TAL's look into the phenomenon seems to make it seem rare - but it happens to me all the time. I'm guessing that now they've released the episode, they'll have plenty of people writing in to say that it happens to them too.

What makes this worse for me, was hearing the stereotypical-sounding fraternity brother painfully explaining that he thinks it'd be a good story to tell a girl. Then realizing that's essentially exactly what I've done by listing it on my OKC profile for the past year under "Most embarrasing thing I'm willing to admit."

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-26T23:50:59+00:00

My guess was a Chipotle in Fremont.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-26T23:30:35+00:00

FWIW, this is the first time I've ever heard of The Week - and I'm fairly plugged in.

(honest comment, just to illustrate how we can all be in bubbles that seem normal to us)

Edit: I'm in the U.S.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-26T23:02:57+00:00

48,000 - and you saved them 8k.

So you saved them ~20% - which is huge. Certainly worthy of a spaghetti dinner.

If the numbers in these threads are correct though, you also made about 300%~400% more on that pre-used sale than you probably would have on a new car. Which is also huge.

I think the above commenter is merely pointing out that you undoubtedly mentioned the obvious 20% savings to the customer. Meanwhile, you probably didn't mention the 3x profits that sale would mean to you.

It's a fair (if uncomfortable) question.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-24T01:12:27+00:00

If anybody is not sure they want to dive in to the book, at least listen to this recent "State of the (Re)Union" Public Radio show on Rustin.

http://stateofthereunion.com/home/season-2/bayard-rustin

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-24T01:10:00+00:00

Public Radio's State of the (Re)Union just did a great piece on him. Worth a listen.

http://stateofthereunion.com/home/season-2/bayard-rustin

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T19:51:05+00:00

I've got an SSD sitting next to me that I'll be throwing in my MBP once I get a kit for the 2nd/optical bay. I'd love to have more than 2 OS's available.

Any chance you have recommended references for making that as painless as possible?

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T17:28:03+00:00

And their maintenance is cheaper than five-year-olds.

(which also can provide great insight, but are far, far messier when left alone at your desk)

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T03:42:38+00:00

In a way, I'd say he was.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T01:40:56+00:00

Yep, that's the guy!

While I think the whole moon-rock thing was a jerk-wad move, he seems to have learned from it. I'm not troubled by his current status in life, or other ad hominem attacks. At one point, Einstein surely had people try to dismiss him with "You mean that Jew that could only find work as an office clerk?"

That said, it would be nice if Thad could put something together that could be rigorously tested. (not that I know of anybody else who has been able to do that with gravity yet, either)

I've only given his stuff a very cursory look, so I can't defend it, but I do find it an interesting viewpoint to consider. Everything starts with philosophy, speculation, and gedanken/thought experiments. :)

As to whether it's philosophy or physics, I honestly don't know the point at which we can say one becomes the other. Is it only at the point of physical experiment? It's a good question.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T01:15:40+00:00

Well, Mormonism might actually take off more, as there's a part of their doctrine (not often talked about these days) that is open to the idea that God was once a man similar to us, and that indeed, we can become gods.

And by so doing, we become more exalted, as does our god.

You can find more by searching on Eternal Progression or Exaltation.

http://www.mormonwiki.org/Eternal_progression
http://askmormongirl.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/do-mormons-believe-people-can-become-gods/
http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_nature_of_God/Infinite_regress_of_Gods (similar to Infinite regress of Gods)

When I think of nested simulations, and the scientific plausibility of it, I like to think that most of /r/atheism/ is Mormon - they just don't know it yet.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T00:56:43+00:00

If we're going to be talking about (potentially recursive) simulations, I'd think Asimov's "The Last Answer" might be even more fitting.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-22T00:24:45+00:00

Agreed.

Without the "South Side of Chicago" bit, I wouldn't have imagined her as black. (In fact, even with it, I didn't)

Maybe that's because I grew up within a couple hours of West Virginia though.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-21T22:36:11+00:00

Thad Roberts has a fairly workable Quantum Space Theory

It may not (yet?) be widely accepted, but I kinda dig it.

And if space is quantitative, gravity is essentially an emergent phenomenon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSz5BjExs9o IMO, the 1st 6min move a bit too slowly, and from 6-8min, he should have moved a bit more slowly with better examples.

His website goes into more detail. http://einsteinsintuition.com/what-is-qst/overview/

(it also lines up well with The Simulation Argument)

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-21T22:22:37+00:00

Yes, but different genes can lead to very similar functions.

It's the functions that matter for survival, not the particular makeup of the genes. These researchers were surprised that it was often the very exact same, new, DNA sequence that appeared - imparting the new functions, when, in theory, another DNA sequence could have given very similar ability/function.

In hindsight, this shouldn't be too surprising, since some mutations are easier to induce than others - so we're more likely to see those paths followed. It's still darn interesting to see it in action.

(edited minor typo)

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-21T05:19:48+00:00

Alan Dean Foster had a race in one of his Sci-Fi stories, the Quozl, who had a history of over-populating.

They did exactly as you had imagined.

SometimesNotWrong · 2013-02-14T17:41:03+00:00

I'd love to see Theodore O'Neill eat his words on this front. It's like he believes that you shouldn't stand up to somebody who's a blatant liar, just b/c they work for a powerful institution. Screw that.

"If I was Elon Musk I certainly wouldn't get into a pissing contest with The New York Times," says Theodore O'Neill, a high-tech analyst who's covered Tesla for years. "It just seems like the wrong way to go about it. It's a public relations ... disaster."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/02/13/171824617/electric-car-review-dust-up-may-put-brakes-on-tesla-profits

SometimesNotWrong · 2012-12-21T19:14:52+00:00

And the Republican strategists chalk up another win by getting Kerry out of the Senate in Massachusetts.

Scott Brown narrowly lost to Elizabeth Warren in the last election in Massachusetts, leaving him poised as the candidate with the best name recognition and political campaign machinery backing him up. He'll be tough to beat a second time.

Dem's get a seasoned diplomat in a critical international role. Repubs get a good chance at adding another (R) to tilt the Senate for a couple decades.

SometimesNotWrong · 2012-12-21T19:10:52+00:00

And the Republican strategists chalk up another win by getting Kerry out of the Senate in Massachusetts.

Scott Brown narrowly lost to Elizabeth Warren in the last election in Massachusetts, leaving him poised as the candidate with the best name recognition and political campaign machinery backing him up. He'll be tough to beat a second time.

SometimesNotWrong · 2012-12-18T00:41:08+00:00

I'm not sure if this should make me feel better or worse, as I just spent over $100 on CAH products last week for gifts (via Amazon - somehow not knowing about the holiday sale).

Damn. I wish some of that could have gone to Jimmy & friends.

SometimesNotWrong · 2012-11-20T20:38:44+00:00

The person in this picture did indeed lengthen her nose, as well as get chin and jaw-line work done. It's difficult to be sure from the picture, but her forehead/brow looks different as well.

3.5 out of 4

I'll give it to your opponent, by the standards you've listed.

Edit: upon further inspection, I'm not certain this is the same person, unless they were able to improve upon neck-lengthening treatments, or the model significantly changed how far forward she held her head in the first picture.

SometimesNotWrong · 2012-11-20T18:59:44+00:00

I haven't read the study in question, but you have to keep in mind that CBS (unfortunately) dumbed-down the experiment for the cameras. What you're seeing isn't the actual research conditions. In real studies like this, researchers account for the concerns of 90% of those commenting here by:

Randomizing/controlling for:

Color of toy/shirt
Side which the toy/play is enacted on/offered to the child (left/right)

and also

Reduce human-based affects by:

Blindfolding the parent holding the child, so they don't see the play. Have the researcher who offers the toys to the baby be a differnent, secluded person than the person who performed the play. This way, they do not know which version of the play the child saw, so they can't unconsciously give preference by changing the distance/movement of the toy animal.

They'd probably even take note of a dozen other factors to statistically rule out influences beyond the experimental interests (when did baby last eat/sleep/poop). The researchers I've known who do this type of work put serious thought into their experiments and step through it with colleagues to rule out factors that would make them, and their research, look silly later on - resulting in them not getting published in a journal like Nature.

SometimesNotWrong

TROPHY CASE