wjy

I think it's more like breach of contract. It's not necessarily unethical, but if you violate the terms, they no longer are bound to provide the service.

EDIT: Although it's unclear whether a contract was really entered into. Real contracts have signatures to indicate both parties know and agree to what's contained. That's often not the case in web services.

Thanks for sharing that.

How did you manage to stay calm and respectful in the face of all the condescension and threat of losing your children? Since my son was born, I've observed my own protective tendencies really ratchet up. The few times I believed he was in real danger, all other concerns fell away, and removing the perceived danger was the only thing that mattered to me. I worry that were I to find my house invaded with people searching my stuff, accusing me of abuse, treating everything as evidence of guilt, the urge to crack some some heads might become overpowering. Of course, I rationally know that's the worst possible thing to do. But in the heat of the moment, the cerebrum doesn't always prevail. How did you keep your cool?

It's especially mad since there's no copying taking place at all.

I think many of us naturally feel that way.

The problem is we rely on other species for our own survival. And the vast web of interconnected life is so complex we don't even know which species are crucial and which are not (we have an idea in some cases, but very few).

Other species manufacture the air we breathe. The current inter-species balance in the oceans is why they're not teeming with jellyfish and nothing else.

We absolutely rely on many other species, even ocean species, for our survival, and we don't completely understand which ones matter to us most. We are part of a huge interspecies network. We do not stand alone, even though it's easy to think so living among all our manufactured artifacts.

Viscerally, I definitely care much more about other humans than I do about some eels or whatnot in the Gulf. But my relative sense of attachment to people and other species, evolved over eons, doesn't necessarily reflect the truth of our interdependence.

EDIT: Grammar

Maybe for some people, the point is to clean up the mess. To them, assignment of blame is less important than aversion of disaster. I'm not sure if I subscribe to that view myself, but I can certainly sympathize with it.

But the article wasn't talking about pseudoscience, alternative medicine, or New Age beliefs. It was talking about women in scientific fields.

Just because a word has multiple definitions doesn't mean you can pick one that doesn't apply and call me wrong.

No, no no. If you're guessing wildly like that, don't bother.

In this case, "woo" refers to the "softer" attributes often associated with women - nurturing, caring, feeling.

I think the fact that one can go from doctor to doctor for 18 years and not get a proper diagnosis speaks volumes about medicine today. We collectively know so much about the human body and its afflictions, but yet so many doctors seem clueless.

The town I grew up in has annual snowmobile races on the lake in July.

Can you summarize what safe harbor provisions were removed? It wasn't clear to me from Stack's writing what, exactly, technical folks were being exempt from.

>I don't stop at a stop sign if I can clearly see that I can go without impacting anyone else. For me stop sign means "the other people have the right of way, don't impact them". I find following the letter of the law "all four wheels to a full and complete stop" irritating, insulting and of little or no value.

I can digest your "rules as guidelines" approach, but blowing stop signs because you feel like it is just stupid.

Why?

Because none of us have perfect perception. Because we get distracted, sometimes at the wrong moment. Because sometimes we just don't perceive an oncoming car. Motorcycle riders are painfully aware of this fact.

We're supposed to stop at stop signs in order to make absolutely sure there's no oncoming traffic. Slowing down and glancing to each side doesn't cut it, and if you think it does, you've got some growing up to do.

Also, the financial aspect is just one part of the total consideration. I've been in my house for ten years, and we've made a life here. We have quite a bit of stuff in this house. It would be a huge pain in the ass to move, as well as disruptive to my family, my son's school life, etc.

Being underwater today doesn't imply being underwater next year. A home's value may return, so long as you didn't buy at some idiotically high price.

The author refers to the distribution of values in the text. That graph is the distribution of leading digits of those values. It doesn't follow that the first digits would also be a normal distribution.

I submit that the author is not finely attuned to teen boys' fashion in his area, and so presumes the nerds are dressed just as "well" as the popular guys. The difference can be made by the smallest things: shoe brand, specific hair style, etc. I know by my age, I'm blind to such differences in that age group.

Also, I object to framing the "popular" situation to be so simple. I was definitely a nerd in school but, like the guys in the post, had a group of friends and my own activities. The popular kids were definitely a different group, but they weren't better than us. It's not a linear ordering of groups.

There's also one other important requirement: it must be GROUNDED. So unless you're willing to wear a wire from your wallet down to the bottom of your shoe, this won't be too effective.

Yes, it does. In a privately held company in the U.S., the shareholders decide what the rules are, so long as they're within the law. They have no obligation beyond that.

Edit: grammar correction

You make a good point. But I wonder, why would the scientists be paranoid? Why aren't they releasing their data and analysis algorithms as part of the package?

I mean, shouldn't the process be something like this:

1. Gather data 2. Analyze it 3. Publish results. 4. Make data and analysis methods available for other to scrutinize. 5. Others review data and methods. 6. New insights from others are realized.

Carl Sagan, my hero, went on and on science's strength being being that although mistakes are made, they can be corrected through the scrutiny of others, and the picture of truth improves. That process hinges on data and methods being available for others to review.

Of course, data will fall into the hands of idiots who will misrepresent, lie, and deceive. Also, your data will fall into the hands of someone who will find an error, or legitimately refute your claims. And that's a good thing.

Some years ago, some astronomers who had previously published evidence supporting the existence of a new planet in another solar system, presented at a conference that further analysis of their own data led them to reverse their conclusion. Their presentation was about a minute long. They received a standing ovation. (I believe I saw this on an episode of Nova - I can't cite a source)

That's how it's supposed to work.

Don't kid yourself. It's much more primitive than that. There have always been, and likely always will be, those who torment anyone who deviates from the norm. Children can be especially cruel to each other. Kids in my school didn't yell "Fag!" to certain individuals as a way to buck authority. They did it because they were mean-spirited and wanted to bully someone.

Bravo. You have a gift for explanation. This is exactly the sort of explanation helpful for someone (like myself) who has been through all the foundations at one point or another, but sometimes forgets the big picture.

"The temptation to help the person in return for a cut of the money" is not the same as "asking for help and promising a cut of the money". You're seeing intent where none is expressed.

There's no appeal for you to do anything shady or stupid.

Wise up. By posting your rumination, you're casting an unwarranted shadow on the whole situation.

A few well-placed curses can emphasize a point and convey emotion. It's all too easy, though, to use too many expletives, and communicate all emotion and no content.

I'm not familiar with City of Heroes.

According to the article, all the action took place in an area where heroes and villains are supposed to be dueling each other, but the social norm was to not do that.

If that really is the case, why get mad at a guy who's fighting villains in an area that's all about heroes and villains fighting? Or was that aspect misrepresented in the article?

I don't have an opinion; I'm asking questions because I don't have any direct experience in the game.

I think it would be much more effective to evaluate whether you're actually good at sophisticated mathematics.

You're presuming that all couples want to have children. There is not "something wrong" with those folks' relationships.

You're right. That was unnecessary.

axiom, I apologize. I don't know what got into me.

Yay you're smart. You get a gold star.

Did you even read the part where he said his code was intentionally simplistic and not optimized? Making a fast/efficient simulation was not the point at all.

Amen. That's exactly how it was for me. I think I was 10 or 11 when I got the Vic-20 I'd been begging for. I was hooked immediately.

Umm, and remember there's no convincing reason to believe cryogenics work. Sure, we've cooled down some animals and brought them back. But keeping a head near absolute zero for years, and expecting to revive a consciousness? No evidence for it. None.

Please accept my apology.

It seems I didn't read the final paragraph in your original post very well.

I was not defending a weakness of Matlab, but instead misunderstood what you said. Indeed, I'm a pretty harsh Matlab critic myself because I know its ugly parts well.

(edit: grammar)

You're misrepresenting the situation a bit. Matlab was not stupid here. The evolutionary algorithm you implemented found a way to satisfy your constraints that you didn't think of. That would have happened regardless of the language you chose.

I'm not arguing that Matlab is beautiful - it's not. I have worked in Matlab for years and years, and know most of its ugliness. But your example highlights your frustration with the task more than any particular weakness of Matlab.