Oh boy, another one who thinks he is the almighty smartass... I answered the question from Dr. Manhattan, dude. You just failed miserably to understand. And honestly I'm not going to spend my time trying to explain given that the tone of your reply suggests to me that you're not the least bit interested in hearing.

I can not be used as a basis for suspecting that I'm too much rational (and not quite human). But I also observed what men do in a similar situation and have not found the same level of divergence between what they say and their actions

Good point. And so now I wait to see what will be the results of the researchers when they do the same with male rats.

Correct.

Why moderated this guy as +1 funny? What he says is true. And I would add that to be possible freedom of will you (reader of tihs post) need to know that part of your behavior is biologically determined, to be able to differentiate it from your rational thoughts and so be able to choose when to obey or not your instincts.

As others have said, you take hasty conclusions based on nothing. I said nothing about men simply because they are not the focus of this topic (after all, the study described in the article does not say if the same thing happens in the case of males, if he said so I would have included men in the subject).

As the others realized I did not say anything about the men because the focus of the topic in this case are women. But if you prefer so, I do not think somehow that men always make purely rational decisions. But having said that, I noticed based on the evidence and simple observation that it is much easier for it to happen in females.

Unluckily I fail in the requirement "needs to be human"

I'm sorry but I've had more than enough evidence that women do not have as much free will as they think. They have to fight hard the instinct (hormones, "get only the alpha male", etc) to have true free will, but they constantly lose. Never stopped to wonder why so many women choose guys that they never would choose according to the rational thought of them? And I can not tell if is something good or bad... Because at the same time that prevents women from accept only wealthy movie stars, it also makes them choose dangerous criminals (on my country is called "amor bandido" (coarsely "thug love")).

You and the "i kan reed" are both right. You humans in general have a very strong mentality to act as "herd". And is very easy for psychopaths take control of these herds and it is very difficult for reasonable people to avoid this, since to convince a flock that they are doing something wrong is necessary that the flock can be able to think, and this is beyond the capacity of the herd (as many have already noticed, an individual is more intelligent and reasonable than a group of humans).

I'm seeing a great example of that right now in my country's elections (Brazil), where the flock moved by the local media (newspapers and television) wants to kill and segregate all who do not conform to the "shepherd" (the media). And the situation is so bad that if the flock win, I may have to leave the country to stay alive.

I understand, but the biggest problem in my view is not running slow, it is expected in a limited hardware. What bothered me on the test was how Firefox OS dealt with this limited hardware, failing to perform basic activities when it should be executing then (even if slowly).

I do not know about you, but for me a "operating system" incapable of doing something as simple as keeping an application in the background when switching to another application is a shitty OS. Hell, he can not even make the alarm work all the time! And the small RAM is not an excuse, I had running Windows 2000 (AND applications) on a machine with only 128MB and a slower processor.

Short version: The way it works in a limited hardware is what separates the good from the bad operating systems. And from what I can see, the folks at Mozilla failed miserably at it.

I never have mod points when I find the really good comments. But, well said.

Martian here. And yes, is very difficult to understand you humans.

This describes my work reasonably well. I'm a civilian, but I work almost exclusive for the military and my work can be summed up to get all their ideas, organize them into something cohesive, trim the loose ends and fill the gaps with my own ideas when necessary. Then present the results and together with them I'll trimming the edges until I have the best possible outcome that meets their needs.

And the best part is that political struggles are virtually nonexistent: If you show them that one idea will not work and explains why, they drop the idea without much fuss (and they are good at giving me good ideas to add too).