The DSM is not about diagnosis, but some retards use it that way. The purpose of the DSM is being a psychiatric dictionary. That means if psychiatrist talk about [illness xyz] then they are reffering to the collection of symption [a, b, c, d].

And yes we needed the DSM, but it has become irrelevant. You see; one can research the brain of a mouse; just scrap this and that away and see what happens. With humans on the other hand, this can't be done in vivo ("while alive"). So people started to gather common collection of symptoms so they could put a label on a person with these symptoms, and ask the 'patient' permission to study the structure of their brain after death.

Now that brain research has vastly improved, all kinds of overlaps start to appear with common 'components'. Say a person with ADHD has RDS and DAT ("dope transport from here to there in brain") problems.

Now that the mesolymbic pathway has been found not to be a pleasure centre, but more of a 'conscious intersection' of the brain, using a serotonine feedback loop to modulate dopaminergic release, all these 'illnesses' start to make a lot of sense. Dopamine actualy sort of highlights/projects emotionaly charged 'thoughts' into human consciousness.

Now all of a sudden check what effects PTSD has on hormone release. Suddenly bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, hallunications, paranoia, anxiety, autism, PDD, psychosocial all make sense. An example:

I'll give you an example:
Imageine this guy is responsible for coding some kind of cashflow algorithm in accounting software. What you guys are going to be doing is adjusting your own code accordingly: working around the bugs.

A month or two later, you all start to get together to investiga why suddenly everything seems so disasterous. Suddenly you all spontaniously find out it is this single asshole who fscks up the entire codebase.

Armed with this spontaniously acquired knowledge you all go up to upper management and say:

Manager: *I need to get this guy fired* "What is the damage?"

Asshole above your social status gets fired, nicer code can be written and CVS horrors are over.

You let him crash and burn. You put oil on the fire, everytime gets pissed of at this guy. Later on, you get together and talk to his manager/boss/supervisor.

You do this in a clever way; as in under the radar. This, however, requires knowledge of social mechanics.

If you try to keep that person from crashing and burning; you'll have to deal with it, for as long as you work with this guy.

Version control is realy old, BTW...

Get of my lawn:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/11/13/1545245/the-math-of-a-flys-eye-may-prove-useful

PS: the mistake you are making, that that the visual cortex of the human brain, does:
A. Everything in linear stages, with parallel computation, and;
B. Likes to not waste calculation power on mundane things like: "Realy? Is that lawn all grass? Let's examine every shape first, in order to make sure there is no soldier out there with cammo, who might just try to shoot me", and;
C. That's where optical illusions come into play: the cortex uses a shitload of shortcuts.

Of course you model would work if there are no shortcuts, but that would be stupid. Unless you try to create some image technology for DARPA, but that's not a human-like form of intelligence. (it's supposed to be better, uh-huh).

Read the follow up I made on your parent post... Download the damn PDF. Stop talking out of your ass.

So in what order does this happen?
1. 120 fps: orientation;
2. 60 fps: motion;
3. 30 fps: color.

The rest of the research can be done on one's own:
http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1000555

These guys are total idiots. There is this thing called research and it's about figuring out how the human brain works. And it's fscking simple:
1. Distance: difference in contrast; (sky has the least amount of it, so everything with a bigger contrast with the least contrast is closest)
2. Motion: bright lights; (for spatial orientation)
3. Depth: two camera's; (compare double images appart)
4. Grouping information: color; (green shit is all nature, gray shit is all building)
5. Recognition: shapes + colors; (does it look like shit I've identified before? If not; store properties, otherwise: already identified until focus on it for a longer period);
6. Et-fscking-cetera.

Seriously...

Kay worked at just that, at Xerox PARC. It was not visual, but let's be honest here; Xerox fscking PARC.

You should check this out:
http://squeak.org/About/

No... It is better.

Yeah they probably mean this paper, lol:
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads//2012/06/Dyckovsky-Publication.pdf

Also "Spooky action at a distance" == Einstein fail...

But nothing can go faster than light, because time is a measurement of change. Something can't possibly go faster, unless it doesn't change but folds dimensionaly. (E8, Lisi, standard model and information theory).

"Connect it to the internet and someone's going to own it!" --Dual Core

Physics are written in Math. Math is written in logic. Logic is form.

If we are to believe the theory (and there is no point in not doing that after 20.000 years of radation before the big bang started happening) that the Higgs Boson is made out of form(ing a shitload of dimensions), then dark matter is simply another dimensional fold. Once these folds clash, they unfold eachother, leaving nothing but nothing, realy.

And then there is the gravity thing, which is, of course, Einstein's stuff; it's the Newton physics of the holographic universe interpretation. In other words: only valid when it comes to interpretation.

There is no gravity, if we are to believe information theory (and one would be a genius to disprove). In fact, we don't even have evidence of gravity, so information theory comes closest to this. But anyway: the universe is like the WipEout HD Fury Playstation 3 disc: the actual raster (so called space time bla bla bla) is 2D. So a very large polygon+texture+shader model could eat up a lot of space on the disk surface and therefore come close to a small model. It doesn't mean that on the 3D TV, the model actually appears close to the large polygon model, displayed 'holographicaly', but the actual space between the storage surface of the game disc is small, faking some 'warped BluRay SpaceTime'.

So there is no gravity thing going on. Gravitational effects are... no wait: the effect is gravity, and is not going on at the dark matter information level. And since you don't want ships made out of matter to smash into anti-matter, because that's not what Huston wants to hear, you could still put a highway there, by simply increasing mass between point A and B, which means less storage between point A and B, which means less shit going on between A and B, which means less 'time' going on between A and B, which means 'OMG TUNNEL!!!!!1111 one one eleven" aka no distance whatsoever.

So there I crushed the magic behind the universe. Where is my price?

If we were to do the right thing, we need to lower our right stuff, so then the realy wrong people are tasked with doing what's right.

It doesn't make sence...

Which is because the MPAA and our friends at MPEG-LA were like: "Hello there. We create non-workaeble movie copies. That is, unless you use MPEG4. Of course the MPEG 4 license from MPEG-LA restricts vendors to play anything not obscurely crappy copyprotected. But hey... We have the Copyright, which is a law we lobbied to be passed, to make sure nobody may ever make useful copies. Of course nobody cared because movies cost money and we need to get paid. It just that we decided to earn money, our way. So now everybody is fscked, because we don't have a legitemate way to earn money, without a law that grands us a monopoly on a piece of work."

And then smart people ignored DRM and John Doe's didn't care. They soon will, but then the rest of us is forced to go completely Free Software mad and decided to put our spare time to better use.

Now where are the people who go outside? Or should I learn some more about computing, like I did before by learning about DRM? I'm sure my time wil have been spend useful while others wasted theirs, watching DRM copies of G.I. Joe or some other mindless crap that is only as useful for living for as long as it's being watched.

Are just saying it is like that or can you realy show me that that's actualy the case?

If you can show me, it just means your comment is just as unworthy as you cracking skills, meaning your comment is worthless.
If you can prove yourself wrong, then you are wrong.
If you can't even know, then your comments mean nothing.
If you can show me proof that human mistakes are avoidable, then you are smart enough to know that Apple didn't avoid them.

You are at the very least not right. Judging by past evidence made, very probably wrong. That makes my comment only more probable, so thanks for commenting me up.