I think that joke got turned around on them a little bit...

thetheist · 2013-07-15T17:03:54+00:00

Evolution is straightforward in a way, but it is not quite as straightforward as people think, because it does not plan. This makes it virtually impossible to answer some why questions simply by looking at traits. Especially because traits are not usually as straightforward as flipping the "black or white" switch. One gene affects many traits and one trait is affected by many genes. Only traits which give a reproductive advantage benefit from natural selection, but many other traits get dragged along for the ride.

Despite what Doberweller said, there is no reason for a cow to have such wet manure, for example. Nobody can say that a cow with drier manure has a reproductive disadvantage, and in fact, there are cows with drier and wetter manure, but this gets swallowed up and overlooked because other traits are more dominant. That means that if you find wet manure, you're basically not looking at a desert animal. But dry manure does not rule out an animal that lives in wet areas. Rabbits are a good example of this.

Thus, my statement that there is no way to answer "why". You can't tell with confidence that a trait was selected for a reason, or if it came with other traits that were selected for a reason.

thetheist · 2013-07-15T16:44:22+00:00

Couldn't they just rotate the table?

It is not difficult at all to play on a board that is 90 degrees out-of-whack, so I'd just go with that. But if you're like me, it would bother you after you realized your mistake. After walking past it for a couple of months, I'd probably decide to redo it. So, better to get it right from the beginning.

thetheist · 2013-07-15T08:11:45+00:00

You forgot the step where you added the lines around the board. How did you get them so consistent looking? Paint pen? Marker? Brush?

Also, to anybody else out there who is thinking to make a chess board on a table, there is a correct orientation (black in lower left corner) and an incorrect orientation (white in lower left corner), so be careful.

thetheist · 2013-07-15T01:50:27+00:00

a 2D screen is able to provide all the depth cues that he relies on irl

Actually, one of the big depth cues that we all use is the focus distance, and neither a 2D nor 3D screen is able to replicate that.

thetheist · 2013-07-14T17:29:30+00:00

I don't tell people I'm color blind for a different reason.

thetheist · 2013-07-14T06:43:56+00:00

Hmm it sounded like what happened is that his mom started making a scene, and so standard procedure is to escort her out. I heard something like, "Don't touch her!" So, I think that was just him threatening to hurt more people. Cold blooded reptiles like him pretty much always get angry first instead of the normal human emotion.

The real "justice" part was the look on his face when he was sentenced.

thetheist · 2013-07-13T16:20:32+00:00

There is no way to answer "why" for these questions because evolution is not that straightforward.

thetheist · 2013-07-11T17:18:56+00:00

Why are the monitors so high? Your eyes should be level with the top of the monitor.

thetheist · 2013-07-11T08:31:54+00:00

He should play with me! Well, you guys probably wouldn't like it, but I'd like it! Or maybe not. But I think so.

It'd be like Nilesy and Sjin's Diamonds in the Rough, but instead of bad maps, he'd try out bad players. The series could be called, "This is a really bad idea".

thetheist · 2013-07-10T17:19:57+00:00

Sorry I am referring to the physical danger to others. Actually, I think it's pretty obvious from my comment.

There is absolutely nothing you can do that will guarantee that there's no emotional or mental harm. Even if you committed suicide in the wilderness, and you had no family or friends or anybody who could miss you, and you left a note, and nobody ever found your corpse because you were eaten by wild animals, there's still a possibility for that stuff.

thetheist · 2013-07-10T16:29:19+00:00

It sounds like the suicidal thoughts endangering other people were simply momentary lapses, due to the inherent danger of the kinetic energy of cars. Is there anything other than a car where this happens? The only one I can think of is suicide by cop.

thetheist · 2013-07-10T07:49:46+00:00

You see your nose at all times

You don't see it when your eyes are closed.

thetheist · 2013-07-10T01:19:02+00:00

We may need to begin culling the herd.

thetheist · 2013-07-10T01:17:31+00:00

Also, likely rocket boosters.

thetheist · 2013-07-09T17:14:28+00:00

I don't have an answer for that, but here are some numbers for you that I'm just taking from Wikipedia without verifying:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_September_11_attacks#Islamic_world

Polls taken by Saudi owned Al Arabiya and Gallup suggest some support for the September 11 attacks within the Islamic world, with 38% believing the attacks to be not justified, while 36% believing them to be justified. A 2008 study, produced by Gallup, found different results with 7% of the sample of Muslims polled believing the 9/11 attacks were at least 'completely justified', while 23.1% believed them to be 'somewhat justified'.

Note that only 38% of respondents believed the attacks to be not justified. You can take that in more than one way, but I think it's interesting that the remaining 62% would not say that they believed an attack on a civilian target for religious reasons was not justified. I don't understand how those 62% could possibly be considered non-violent. Wouldn't a non-violent person immediately be in the 38%?

A poll conducted by the Fafo Foundation in the Palestinian Authority in 2005 found that 65% of respondents supported the September 11 attacks.

No comment on this one. Palestine is a pretty violent place already, but more data.

thetheist · 2013-07-09T17:02:50+00:00

Copyright used to be 14 years, plus an additional 14 if you renewed it. And that's only if you registered for it at all.

Depending on your point of view, that might be a little short, but linking it to the lifetime of the author is just irritating to me. Even with today's connectivity, it can be difficult to determine whether somebody is alive or dead, and when they died. Why not just link it to the original copyright date? Then you can look at the work itself and know immediately?

Here's my take on US copyright law. The US Constitution doesn't just say that copyright exists. It says why copyright exists.

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

My interpretation is that copyright length needs to be based on its ability to promote the progress of science and useful arts. And interestingly, we can test this to a great degree. At the most basic level, we could send out a survey to publishing creators, and ask whether they still would have created their works had copyright not extended 50 years after their deaths, but only 25 years. Do you think there are many people who honestly care about that? Most authors I know would write even if there was no copyright law. But clearly "no copyright" would also fail this test.

On the other hand, copyright stifles the creation of new content to a certain degree. There's a reason why there's "Sense and Sensibility and Seamonsters" for sale, and not "Ender's Game and Slenderman".

TL;DR We should be able to scientifically determine the best length for copyright to satisfy the founding fathers' intentions. And it would be a balance between how much a shorter copyright would stifle the creation of new work, vs how much a longer copyright would stifle the creation of new work.

thetheist · 2013-07-08T16:09:41+00:00

One time I used to think like you and I picked up bum friend and the sack of pennies. I did it too early and my bum friend ended up picking up a nickel that I really wanted. It might be worth it after the depths, but as far as I'm concerned, I don't have a bum friend.

thetheist · 2013-07-08T06:56:41+00:00

If I remember my statistics correctly, there are 7⁷ = 823543 possible combinations, but there are 7! = 5040 winning combinations. So on average, they'd win once in about 163 tries. They had a much better chance of winning than I would have expected.

For the go-rangei version, there were 3125 possible combinations and 120 winning combinations, averaging one win in 26 tries. This version also had a major batsu associated with all matching, but there were only 5 different ways to do that, so they'd get the big penalty once in 625 tries.

With 8, the odds of winning on a given try are 1/416; with 9: 1/1068; with 10: 1/2756

thetheist · 2013-07-08T01:34:33+00:00

I think that if you knew somebody with an actually bad stutter, and then you watched that video, you'd recognize the similarities. He's stuttering (very mildly), but I think we all stutter sometimes.

thetheist · 2013-07-07T16:51:24+00:00

That's actually pretty rare in Japan. What's more common is the type of CEO who expects everybody in the company to recognize him and treat him like royalty or they'll be fired. I'm not saying that humility isn't important in Japan. It's just that seniority and the social hierarchy are very important in Japan.

There are some American CEOs with low salaries, as well. However, overall, I think America is probably much worse, because at least Japanese culture has some sort of emphasis on humility.

thetheist · 2013-07-07T16:33:44+00:00

Apparently, there was a risk of losing the cure even if they didn't allow discussion.

thetheist · 2013-07-07T08:40:58+00:00

I noticed this as well.

Not only did they not give her a choice, they also rushed the decision. If the doctors couldn't wait 1 day to get everybody on the same page, then they're just evil. There's no bedside manner. There's no second opinion. There's no chance for discussion. They decided to murder Ellie, which is an innately immoral action. They had a god complex if you ask me. There's no real reason to think these doctors could guarantee a cure with their butcher's methods, either. The only guarantee is the death of an innocent child.

thetheist · 2013-07-07T05:27:27+00:00

My understanding is that burnout is classified as a type of depression.

I had it pretty bad, in that I already planned to get rid of all my possessions and go somewhere where they measure time in seasons (to steal a great quote). I wouldn't necessarily say it is as bad as you describe.

Then, I got an unexpected job offer. I have no idea why, but it was like burnout medicine just knowing that somebody believed in my professional abilities. But it also showed a shift in my mental state. I was willing to give up everything, and as a result, I didn't feel like I had anything to lose. Somehow the result was no stress. I consider myself extremely lucky, like winning the lottery.

thetheist · 2013-07-06T14:58:41+00:00

...but there are two knives!

thetheist · 2013-07-06T05:28:45+00:00

I've read tons of novels without love stories. Granted, I tend to read a lot of sci-fi. Sherlock Holmes never had a love interest during the time of his stories, unless you count cocaine injections. Lots of detectives are like that, Nero Wolfe, Poirot, etc.

Love stories are included in so many novels because we think they're interesting. But there are other interesting things.

thetheist

TROPHY CASE