wrongc0ntinent

Guess which paradox applies here.

>There seems to be confusion about what constitutes 'strength' and what constitutes 'weakness' in regard to human personalities (or 'hard' vs 'soft')

This here is the crux of the matter, and we only stand to lose if we go on with all the hyperbole and analogies around psychopathy. The value and consistency of what constitutes "weak" and "strong" depends to a large extent on the feedback we (and "they") get in everyday interaction (whether they live in a city or grow up around Baloo the bear). Burying psychopathy down to some exclusive and immutable genetic level is to ignore this (I'm not talking about causes here, but about behavior reinforcement and motivation).

Absolutely. Not only this, but in many of our power structures (ones where human potential is not a metric) there are obvious benefits to being a psychopath, thereby maximizing exposure and potential gene transmission.

David Sirlin wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sirlin

Usually I don't give a crap about scalability, but that trust post got me to. (Edit: sticking to facts ;)

The single coolest thing in the paper (other than Shamir's name): "On many laptops (e.g., most Lenovo ThinkPad models), the chassis potential can be easily reached by a human hand, through metal connectors and conductive coating on metal surfaces. Thus, an attacker can measure the chassis potential by merely touching the laptop chassis with his hand. Surreptitiously, the attacker can simultaneously measure his own body potential relative to the room’s ground potential, e.g., by having a concealed differential probe touching both his body and some nearby conductive grounded surface in the room. Perhaps surprisingly, even this circuitous measurement offers sufficient signal-to-noise ratio for the key extraction attack."

>> most illegally grown marijuana uses large amounts of stolen electricity

Source? Reasoning?

Previous hn entry: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6265613

Hopefully :)

Yeah, funny thing "defending" bacteria. I guess my point is that very simple organisms can have large a impact (on us, given the anthropocentric view I'm replying to here). Viruses for instance.

While your techno-optimism is very inspiring, I'd rather not be the victim of a solar system black plague either. On the other hand, since we're speculating, I'm looking forward to the one piece of "dirt on a rock" somewhere that can make me immune to radiation while on my space voyage.

"The human body contains over 10 times more microbial cells than human cells, although the entire microbiome only weighs about 200 grams (7.1 oz), with some weight estimates ranging as high as 3 pounds (approximately 48 ounces or 1,400 grams)." [0]

You would literally not be the same animal you are now had bacteria not helped you along the way.

[0]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microbiome

This is very shortsighted. What is "interesting"? With all the knowledge Alexander Flemming had about bacteria in the 1920's, it was an accident that he discovered penicillin (by contamination from a neighboring lab, while on vacation). Assuming you know the absolute value, or even the best case scenario when it comes to biology is one way to only rely on accidents for important discoveries. Probably not the smartest thing to do.

Torgensen is the program manager for C# design and specs, this came from his presentation at NDC London, here's another rundown: http://adamralph.com/2013/12/06/ndc-diary-day-3/

Presses are prohibitive to most, though in cities you're likely to find at least one shop where you can buy press time, usually that comes with all supplies other than paper.

Anyone willing to take a shot at a good, concise definition of creativity?

Right on. Worth mentioning that the illuminated manuscripts of the time were the gold standard, and even though the Gutenberg bibles were not illuminated in the print shop, that's most likely why they had plenty of room in the margins.

Edit: Since you seem to have a convenient source there, could you link to some of the better medieval manuscript repositories online? Bookmarks got lost over the years.

Pretty sure that was sarcasm, but either way, the above link is worth reading.

It can run on AWS: http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/13/mainframe2-which-pipes-win...

Robert Sapolsky[0] has his Stanford course on human behavioral biology on youtube, almost in its entirety. The whole course is very accessible and much broader than the topic here, but if you wanna go straight for the molecular genetics section, it's parts 4 & 5. Amazing lecturer.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sapolsky

I think the issue here was assuming that the optimization is the best possible one. It doesn't have to be, it just needs to be good enough to still function given past and present evolutionary pressure.

This is MailChimp's blog entry on the changes: http://blog.mailchimp.com/how-gmails-image-caching-affects-o...

That's really not the conclusion you should be getting if you apply (my?) logic.

Of course math is involved. But those things were not built for the sake of math, their "roots" are in their respective functions (building something impressive, something religious, or crossing a bay).

Edit: I just checked your [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge reference. You seem to be saying that this geological formation ("transoceanic bridge") is about mathematics too, implying it's man-made. If that's the case, we're playing by different rules of what "logic" means, and our discussion is completely pointless, no offense intended.

Makes for a questionable source, which is important for any serious study.

Propaganda: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

Numerology doesn't exclude calculations.

"Root" makes it sound like the purpose of building the very nice step well is to prove a mathemathical point. I'd venture to say its primary purpose had something to do with water.

Patterns and repetition is what I see beyond that, which are fairly prevalent in art and architecture exactly because you can get to them by simple experimentation.

>Math has to be at the root of it.

Numerology is just as likely of a root.

Good example, poor wording.

I understand, but at this point you'd expect some sort of intelligent flow in the platform. You definitely wouldn't expect to have an adversarial relationship with it, which is exactly what happens when they take advantage of your trust in their UX. Why would "+connect" imply sending email invitations? If they re-purpose terminology they should be very clear about it, to the point where it's understood. I'm not shooting down the concept or the content, but it becomes immediately clear where they're coming from, to their detriment.

Good post. It's actually pretty clear this is in the design though. I don't know of any languages where "connect" means "send email (including to people you may admire professionally but only met once in your life, if that". The "+" might be the only thing keeping that button away from complete misrepresentation.

Didn't dig much, but the "146% open source" line might be a reference to Putin.[0]

[0]http://gawker.com/5864945/putin-clings-to-victory-as-russias...