I agree that overall the word choice is poor/ambiguous.
But I think grammatically "undetectable" modifies "sound" here, which is true if the physical stimulus is not detectable as sound, but tactile.
1,233 karma · joined August 4, 2017
But I think grammatically "undetectable" modifies "sound" here, which is true if the physical stimulus is not detectable as sound, but tactile.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36130581-the-growth-delu...
These are all factors that people should be taking into account, and yet unfortunately they do not. Some of it is practicality, it's incredibly challenging and expensive to control for everything, so you randomize certain factors instead. Confounding effects can sometimes be small enough to be washed out anyway.
Nonetheless, it is known by psychophysicists (people who do their best to measure behavior rigorously) that all of these factors are important. Good behavioral research is incredibly challenging to get right, the best people know this, but most published behavioral research is quite sloppy.
I knew a rodent behavior professor in grad school who happened to only have women in his lab. No reports of being a creep, lots of reports of him being extremely rigorous in methodology.
"...grey shading indicates the valid range between perfect performance and a random classifier."
What's with the diagonal cutoff at the bottom of the plot? I understand where the dotted line comes from, but I expected the grey shading lower bound to stop at the dotted line entirely.
Note: '?' required for link to work
The point is that there's little evidence behind different people having different learning styles, and that in general everyone is every "style".
This implies that vision, in addition to many other sensory modalities, is useful. As you point out, the utility of of 3b1b is in line with this point.
There are various ways to measure these thing in animals and humans physiologically (ABRs, otoacoustic emissions, invasive and noninvasive electrophysiology), and with careful psychophysical experiments. None are perfect or comprehensive. Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses.
But it is indeed more complex than just testing a basic audibility threshold. The same issues come up with audigorams for hearing aid calibration and hearing in noise.
As for the honor code I cynically suspect it's more about having an item go use against someone when the university chooses, rather than a true standard that all are held to at all times. If nothing else, it's just tough for a large institution to handle all of its problems at once.
Happy to be wrong.
Proponents of one system over the other worry that voters will get confused, or worse, that established groups that disagree with the reform could attack a new voting system as too complicated.
Personally I think this is part of the reason approval has gotten more traction than score or STAR systems, but who's to say. The Center for Election Science has better PR and web design than https://www.rangevoting.org/, which largely advocates for Score voting.
But it's a multifaceted issue. Academics argue over different methods, and even as a casual observer it seems pretty clear that no system is flawless.
For anyone who hasn't read "Gaming the Vote" by Poundstone, it's a useful introduction that discusses both the academic study and practical use of voting systems.
We see this over and over in press releases when new research is focused on one mechanism (e.g. mitochondria). To me "weird tricks" that capture whole body or lifestyle changes are at least worth paying attention to. While "weird tricks" in the name of a single biological mechanism are indeed overblown (but still worth knowing if you're in to that sort of information).
Ask that same 60% if they wanted a month of work from home pre-COVID and I'd bet on at least 33% saying yes, if not more.
This might not defend against all deep fakes, but at least it could in certain cases with more...official videos. I'm not sure how this could defend e.g. a person from a deep fake someone made of them without their knowledge. But I'd like to hear what people who are more knowledgable than me think.
2. Many people think that what they learn in school or from other authorities is immutable fact and that's the end of discussion. This is an unfortunate failing of the education system.
I agree. But as you point out this is basically a reaction to the inverse: some loud non-scientists, which are overwhelmingly skeptical of science/medicine for the sake of sowing distrust, rather than being followed up by critical discussion.
I'm not in favor of blind trust of anything. But for "scientism" it's an unfortunate reactionary message against the blind and blanket mistrust of science/medicine that has become popular e.g. on some circles of the internet.
The problem is that many of the "skeptics" in media are more concerned with contrarianism and sowing doubt than healthy debate.
How do you have a rational discussion with someone who comes to the table set on not trusting the scientific process?
I took 4 days off in the middle of reaching a deadline just to correct my ergo setup, and the rest combined with learning really helped.
1. Take breaks! I know it sucks, I was on a deadline. But you'll be cursed with 0 deadlines later (out of work) if you push it too far.
2. A vertical mouse is better than a standard mouse because it moves the pressure from your sensitive, soft tissue under your wrist to the side. But your arm/wrist isn't immune there either. This prevents strain in my wrist now, but during an intense period, it doesn't help. Assuming you get the right trackball, trackball > vertical mouse > standard 'flat' mouse.
3. The best sources I've found are a little outdated in terms of webpage but in the end helped me immensely! The Cornell Human Ergo lab [0] is a big site with lots of useful information, namely a quick snapshot of roughly idealized setup with points like negative keyboard tilt [1], and a checklist for yourself [2].
4. A trackpad is in some ways better for your arm position than a mouse, because it's closer to your body's midline. Of course, a track pad can be worse on your fingers/hand.
5. Your ergo setup and body is a system. Even if you make one objectively positive change, this may result in undue pressure on another part of your body. Watch your aches and pains and adjust each accordingly. This usually takes iteration, or changes throughout the day (i.e. time split standing vs. sitting; time split using mouse, trackball, pen tablet).
Edit: #6 it goes without saying but is worth emphasizing: get regular exercise, sleep, and eat a balanced diet. These 3 go a long way. IME even brief brisk walks during breaks were better than simple breaks away from the keyboard.
[0] http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/ [1] http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/DEA6510/dea6512k/ergo12tips.ht... [2] http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/CUVDTChecklist.html
Incremental custom projects is a good way to learn -- not everything has to be "useful for others", especially where learning and practice is concerned.