They have to be big enough to pick up a grit. We've got fire ants here in Texas practically big enough to carry a grapefruit and it works really well on them.
Tiny sugar ants I've found won't eat the grits. Instead, I find out where their line of attack is, and I spray some chemicals along their trail, which confuses the hell out of them, and they go somewhere else
Let's forget that it was ibuprofen, and throw the school out of it for a second.
I agree, let's pretend this took place in a leprechaun forest, and an elf child was caught trespassing. They demanded the child's immortality necklace for this, it being a rule they had made up on the spot. This was totally fair and reasonable, in leprechaun society, in fact, it is unwritten law that all laws must be made up on the spot.
The elf-child gave away this light of her heart, a gem necklace given to her by her mother, that protected her from natural death, and slowed her aging.
Returning to her home in the elf-forest, she came upon the elders at the gate, but they refused to let her pass without her necklace. They did however send word to her parents of her return, by way of a stark-white dove.
Her parents soon arrived at the gate, dark, angry magic sparkling in their eyes, and so determined were they to retrieve her amulet that they did not even notice her as they passed her. They could sense its location, were drawn to it. They had made it, of themselves, for they had no heirloom gem for her, she had been an unexpected gift.
Before they reached the leprechaun forest they began to fly, so as not to trespass, as did their daughter, and thus risk their own gems by forfeit. Find the amulet they did, and they hovered above it in the air, and their will to retrieve it was so strong that their very voices deepened and strengthened, so that the sound of it filled the nearby wood.
" Return the stone of life to us immediately !," they warned.
The leprechauns convened a court to decide the issue according to leprechaun law. How would they decide?
So ignoring the details of this case, I don't think it's so clear cut.
Wow, I totally agree! It's like we're on the same mental plane of existence or something. You just blew my mind with that one statement. That's some heavy, far-out shit.
That all said, it's obvious that ibuprofen is not harmful and they should know the difference. On the other hand, million-dollar liability can cloud the judgment of even the most rational folks, of which very few are employed as school administrators. That liability makes them err on the side of caution, in this case, erring like crazy.
Is this going to be the new excuse of pedophiles at school? "I had to err on the side of caution because everyone knows that chicks carry aspirin in their vaginas."
Unlike the child, these adults knew better. There is no evidence that they had even a school policy allowing strip searches, yet you're leaping in to defend them on the basis of rules. You've outlined no reason for the benefit of the doubt, other than the mere fact of their authority.
If there was anything clouding their judgment, it seems to me that the simplest explanation is sexual deviancy, not some pure intention to see that the rules got obeyed. Why not call the cops, if a strip search is warranted? Because you want to do it yourself, that's why.
That's also why it made national news, and why it doesn't happen every day. Rational adults know better. Defending this as rationality gone awry is giving to much credit to the power mad perverts.
PC is a draconian left-wing policy; this is a draconian right-wing policy.
Since when is PC a policy? What organization is it the policy of, what is the platform of that organization, and what are the specifics of the policy?
Oh, you were talking out of your ass. Never mind.
No, I would not strip search another persons child, especially a female. I would be instantly charged with pedophilia and thrown in jail.
Yet someone petty tyrant in authority, who does it based on an anonymous tip that she might have, **GASP**, IBUPROFEN, is an upstanding citizen?
Bullshit. I don't give those assholes the benefit of the doubt because they don't deserve it. It isn't normal behavior to make your student strip for advil. If it isn't worth calling the cops over, it isn't worth a strip search, period, and the very idea that the school officials didn't know they were crossing a line is absurd.
I have seen things get smuggled in underwear, as far back in such conservative times as the mid 90s. I knew girls who used their bra's to conceal more than kleenex.
Oh my god, you are so full of shit. This girl had nothing. What if your girl had to strip every day for the principal, because some other student accused her of having advil? You keep bringing up irrelevant hypotheticals to exonerate the school, so it's only fair that I invent some bullshit too.
I would rather the supreme court did not rule against this, that it were left to the school districts and parents to decide and take responsibility for.
Really? That's the best you can come up with? Parents should decide for themselves if their sons and daughters can be strip searched for advil? Well, okay, fine. Wanna place a bet on Intrade as to which side 99% of parents come down on? Give me a break. No parent in their right mind would call this reasonable.
Apathetic parents are the usual reason teachers don't bother to call home anymore. I know several school teachers and I know the parents they want to call never get involved.
Once again, WTF does this have to do with the incident in question? Seems like this particular mom is pretty highly involved , actually, and you have no evidence otherwise. You seem to have a severe right wing authoritarian mindset, which allows you to come up with so many irrelevant excuses for this sickening behavior, simply because these ladies worked for the school. You've come up with no other reason, and I even have to guess at that one for you.
I think parents and schools need to negotiate with each other about how discipline will be maintained, and what level of authority the schools can excersize (and what level of responsiveness is expected).
Nah. Screw that. Strip searches over the accusation of advil are a sickening abuse of authority, and that's not negotiable. Anyone who argues otherwise likely has some other agenda. Do you work for a school?
Is this is true, then you have licensed me (and the rest of Slashdot) to do all these things, and what you said above (that it is not covered under any license) is false.
Oh, crap, I always mess this one up. I think you're supposed to ask the gargoyle on the left a question like, "what would you say if I asked you if the gargoyle on the right is a liar?" Then, the gargoyles fly off together and mate in a surprisingly disturbing and unfortunately very public display. Then you're free to sneak into the castle. Something like that?
True. Back in 1937 there weren't as many other jobs available.
Also true: rights won build economies, and societies. You can't divorce unions from history and ignore all of the gains that were made with real blood, and say, sure, that's great, but unions suck.
The real world is filled with examples of non-unionized workers being paid more in better conditions, and counterexamples, and converse examples, and everything between. Sometimes unions really are necessary, if you're in a particular line of work, or you end up getting treated like a slave in dangerous conditions.
It's oh-so-popular to trash unions now, which is a lot like trashing the 1776 revolution because the American government kind of sucks. That's my point.
No. Without a healthy union, companies still have to contend with labor supply and demand. If they abuse their employees, the more competent employees will flee to other jobs
Spoken like someone who was not involved in The Battle of the Overpass
Could Firefox add some sort of public/private key extensions signing so I can sign extensions I want to use? Then unsigned extensions wouldn't be loaded and this sort of thing could be stopped ( by the technical minded anyway ).
Yes, it could. You can also take out your garbage, walk your dog, and feed your kids. Like, now dude. Chop chop!
The article was about language ability, and it wasn't limited to the mentally retarded. I suggest you re-read it.
Did you read my P.S.? It was a lot more interesting article about a bacteria that used quantum entanglement to process energy from the sun.
In any case, you seem to think that I'm trying to sell you something. I'm actually just describing a way of visualizing what I'm doing with artificial intelligences. It could be that what I'm modeling doesn't exist in the real world, but, as it turns out, that's okay if it can solve a practical problem, like finding depth in a photograph.
What I was trying to impress on you is that we have pathways that lead to various areas of processing in the brain. For example, our visual pathways have a lot of branches, but they start with the eyes, and branch out in various ways, but with a pattern.
If those individual neurons can "sense" quantum entanglement, and if quantum entanglement is more likely with proximity, then it could be that pattern recognition pathways learn to make sense of the quantum entanglement.
Earlier you asked me to prove that certain words like "red" and "table" followed certain neural patterns. I cannot prove anything like that. What has been proven is that we have pattern recognition neurons, and we have sight transfer pathways, and sound transfer neural pathways and we have all these specialized neurons for different tasks. Retinal neurons are very different from hippocampus (memory) neurons.
Furthermore, these neurons are connected in similar ways for similar tasks. We have sight neurons that lead directly to our motor neurons, so we can react quickly, and we have memory neurons that constantly bounce signals back and forth, reinforcing what we've learned.
All of our neurons can recognize patterns, so if you pre-suppose that there are quantum influences on the neurons, and that these quantum influences have patterns that are recognizable, it stands to reason that a pattern recognition device can make a sort of sense out of it.
All of this abstract theory has a relation to actual nuts and bolts AI research. I'm working on it now, so I can't say if it is useful all. I have a hunch that it is, and that it's related to the problem of ESP. I have lots of experiments to do.
What I'm saying is, don't feel like I'm some kind of new-wave preacher. I have no real interest in whether you believe me or not. My end goal is to make money, and whether you believe me is inconsequential as to whether I can play Go better than Gnu Go.
Citation please (and yes, I know where I'm posting...). Specifically, please provide a reference that proves that even basic concepts like "red", "stop" and "person" are translated into neural signals that are consistent across all people...
I'm not claiming that, though.
Have you ever noticed that you seem to be more "in tune" with some people than others, or met someone who thinks like you? Have you noticed that this is dependent on mood, what you ate for breakfast, etc? I agree with you that it is.
Anyway, you asked for a cite, here's just one, that explains how people who have similar pathways have similar language ability.
http://www.pnas.org/content/104/43/17163.full.pdf?ck=nck
And therein lies the problem: "wildly different interpretations" do not make a solid foundation for communication.
Again, I'd never make the claim you can have a conversation in your head with someone. I've never experienced that, myself. I have experienced being "in tune" with someone though, and I think we all have to one degree or another.
Do two different brains operate in the same way, though? What data format do you use for the transmission of information? It's not like we all install the same mental OS when we're born...
Not the same, but similar in a lot of ways. We all have certain neural pathways that operate similarly. This isn't a guess, but proven.
Think of it more as two people hearing the same song. They may have wildly different interpretations, but they are hearing the same music.
It may sound strange, but I've been doing my own garage experiments around these lines. We know that lots of particles are "entangled" all of the time. It seems to me to be a data storage mechanism. If the particles are all just different representations of an underlying particle, it's a way of representing a lot more than is actually "real".
I'm very interested in the results of this experiment, because, in a real way, it's human observers realizing the "same" thing, at the "same" time, which is what I have come to realize is the phenomenon known as ESP.
I don't think there's any such thing as reading another person's thoughts, but I can propose a real quantum and biological mechanism for people to think along the same lines, simultaneously, and it even has implications for neural AIs, which is what I'm working on.
I don't mind giving away my brilliant idea, because I figure someone else probably thought of it simultaneously, and plus, the devil is in the details, ain't it?
Actually, that last bit is in dispute, if you RTFS.
Nonsense. The data from this particular survey are in dispute, and people here are conflating this to all of climate science. That the earth is warming, and that globally, ice is melting at an alarming rate, is not even disputed by the oil industry any more.
If you feel comfortable doing linear extrapolations on a highly nonlinear system, anyway.
If the atmosphere heats up, physics predicts that the ground will heat up as well, and that ice will melt.
You're correct that the system is more complex than that, because, for example, melting ice can trigger other mechanisms that are too complex to model, currently. This doesn't refute the very basic fact that adding global heat to the atmosphere tends to melt ice.
I'd also point out that we know all of this because we've studied it scientifically, just the same way that we know that CO2 tends to heat the atmosphere, and ice tends to melt with warmer air.
Any given program will expand to fill available memory.
