640 karma · joined August 20, 2009
It isn't anti-intellectual to question the validity of any analysis. Your argument, taken to its conclusion, provides as much protection for the previously mentioned analysis of Miley Cyrus's dance being a grounded argument to make, as it does for my claim that she was subconsciously invoking the goddess Kali.
Mattress quality has a great deal to do with measuring their enjoyment of a mattress.
Timing attacks for instance, could plausibly fall out of optimizations that terminate a loop when it's clear that the value being computed won't change (e.g. is false and is repeatedly getting anded with things). This would probably be even worse for power consumption or other side channels. For a potentially easier to measure side channel, you might try introducing some state-dependent delay (short and caused by something like that loop optimization) in a bit of code preceding a packet send.
Alternately, introducing (via incorrect optimizations) the right kinds of buffer overruns or race conditions that corrupt a pointer just right, could get you a nice stack smashing exploit with certain (very abnormal) inputs -- and remote access to the machine in question.
50 will do better/worse than the MEDIAN of that GROUP OF 100 fund managers, not the market averages.
"but it must exist because my subjective perception tells me it does." seems like a rhetorical trick, consciousness is the underlying mechanism of perception, so it's not my perception of it that tells me it exists, it's the fact that I have perception at all.
As for a null hypothesis, how about this: "If my qualitative experience is no different to the state of a Turing machine, it should be possible to temporarily modify my mental state to remove all qualia -- so that I perceive nothing, but am still able to process everything" (In short, if I'm running code like sensoryData.processWithFeedbackTo(consciousness.Perception), it should be possible to do sensoryData.processWithFeedbackTo(null) temporarily)
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that it's fruitless to place the burden of proof on a statement which is syllogistically isolated from any statement known to be true?
Scott Aaronson's Quantum Physics is one: http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html
Are these within reach of an individual to build, if not to launch?
If I build one, how do I launch it?
Why do the signals need to be crowdsourced over Ham?
What are your personal favorite/most cool applications for lots of cheap satellites?
Seems like a promising approach. Does anyone know about this?
I'm not saying that a piece of art that no one ever cares about after it's created is valuable, but it's hard to judge the value of art based on current popularity. Plus, the judgement of popularity is influenced by the culture at a given time, and the existence of a given work or works might have a pretty big impact on the course of that culture's evolution -- regardless of its initial ability to gain funding.
There are also the practical difficulties of making sure that the funding request gets in front of the people who'd appreciate the work in question, and that they have the money to be able to afford to donate, and that they're not disinclined from donating for reasons that have nothing to do with the artwork in question (e.g. they think kickstarter is some phishing site, or think there's no point since they can only give a very little bit).