Not the world, the US.
- Sure, in this case.
- The US is part of the world.
- I was expressing my thoughts on a general and common failure mode that I have attempted to correct, and that this article provides evidence I have failed to do so.
Thanks for the details.
Can you see how this sort of thing, applied through a whole educational career, would tend to discourage learning and accomplishment?
Even if it's true (at least until transhumanism really gets going) that the best mathematicians will always be men, it's not as though second rank mathematicians are useless.
It seems to me that, given people are already sexist, and given that telling someone their group has a lower average directly lowers their performance, such a re-weighting should never ever be used.
I would dearly like citations for everything - I would really like to know if I am still terrible at estimating how awful the world is.
Why?
You might be remembering the times you are correct more clearly than the times you are wrong.
Another interpretation: Try to figure out which side has more intelligent defenders and control for that when evaluating arguments.
Isn't the real problem here that the author of the quote was asking the wrong question, namely "Mormonism or non-Mormon Christianity?" when he should have been asking "Theism or atheism?" I don't see how controlling for which side had the more intelligent defenders in the former debate would have helped him better get to the truth. (I mean that may well be the right thing to do in general, but this doesn't seem to be a very good example for illustrating it.)
That may be too much to ask for. Besides, if the horse evidence had worked, you'd be forced to turn around and apply it to Jesus...it may not have worked for her, but it has worked on some theists.
Parents (or contemporaries of parents) who turn out to be surprisingly wise are a staple of a certain kind of YA fiction.
I wonder if this is a slight reaction to another kind of YA fiction, in which adults are useless, often from stupidity.
I have always had an animal fear of death, a fate I rank second only to having to sit through a rock concert. My wife tries to be consoling about mortality and assures me that death is a natural part of life, and that we all die sooner or later. Oddly this news, whispered into my ear at 3 a.m., causes me to leap screaming from the bed, snap on every light in the house and play my recording of “The Stars and Stripes Forever” at top volume till the sun comes up.
-Woody Allen EDIT: Fixed formatting.
She quotes textbooks word for word, all the time.
I am having difficulty finding evidence of this. Could you perhaps give an example? (Ideally, a passage from the book.)
Yeesh, I know she at least once remembered the right section and page, then read from the book, and I feel like she's quoted books before, but darned if I can find it easily.
Well, it doesn't say you have to win quickly.
I was skeptical at first, but consider it this way: At each step you make a subtree simpler, and then insert an arbitrary number of copies of the simpler subtree. Eventually you must end up with a large number of copies of the simplest possible subtree, a single node off the root. Those don't grow the hydra when removed, so you you chop them all off and then win.
I found I could see this intuitively if I chopped the top-most head of the most-complex tree for the first several rounds, in most configurations; you'll see whatever tree you're working on get wider, but shorter. It helps to lower the starting number of nodes to 7 or so, as well.
Yes, while it was clear on a second reading this was also clear, thanks.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
[link] XKCD on saving time; http://xkcd.com/1205/ Image URL (for hotlinking/embedding): http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/is_it_wor Though it will probably be mostly unseen as the month is about to end.