well, yes, and so is all of life, if you want to think of it that way. what's your point?

Yeah, they both have spatial components, but go is basically nothing else. There are no distinct pieces with special rules; practically all of the strategy is from spatial arrangements without obvious shortcut heuristics. Counting material doesn't work so well and neither does combinatorially forcing your opponent.

This isn't to say that go is better than chess, and i definitely think the left/right-brain distinction is overrated, but they are not "the same."

tortious.

i'd say go, probably. the rules are more minimal; the state space is larger and more connected with fewer dead-ends and "gotchas"; and it seems just as difficult/competitive. it's not unreasonable to think that games with more rules will tend to produce more specialized skills, and that specialized skills are inferior to general skills as far as "brain development" (whatever that means) is concerned.

also, dual n-back is supposedly shown to increase general intelligence rather than just skill. it's not exactly a lot of fun, but that's not the point.

no, you don't understand! a real man fucking crushes his enemies. "discussion" is for effeminate white knights!!

of course, this is entirely about how neil degrasse tyson has humiliated himself, and in no way reflects b33rninj4's personal issues.

uh, yeah, i've had extensive elite education in STEM, in the US. it's mostly a sausage fest. statistics will back this up and, no, they're not fabricated by teh feminist conspiracy.

i have to conclude that anyone who's bitterly complaining about women having taken over STEM is just a delusional loser who probably just couldn't hack it.

sure, why not? logical fallacies only apply to logical arguments. when someone is just spewing bullshit, anything goes.

if females are dominating STEM fields by 2:1, i'll eat my shoes.

i agree that "incentive" programs are also bullshit, but why stoop to that level?

okay, this seems like it is going to degenerate into a pointless quibble over what an "accomplice" is, since the shit article has no discussion of the evidence or lack thereof. not interested.

at least you seem to have some idea of a general duty of responsibility. for example, it would be disingenuous for a chop shop to continue to accept, daily, a number of cars exceeding the legitimate resale market and of which a large number are later reported stolen. you probably understand that, so i don't really care about the rest.

And a chop shop is just buying huge amounts of car parts for cash. What's wrong with that? Car parts are legal! Cash is legal! Come on, cut my cousin Vinnie a break, he's just a poor kid who grew up in the South Bronx, your honor!

yeah, Viacom probably didn't want to deal with subpoenas and a federal investigation from the comments of people like you.

pretty wise of them, really.

yeah, it's exactly as valid as saying that, as an American, i have a 14.1% chance of being black. that statistic is "simply based" on demographic numbers, and just as good as the overall average of murder numbers.

you never know if that person could one day suffer from a mental problem

sure but these probabilities are not uniform across all subpopulations.

i wish you the best in recovering from whatever you've experienced that caused you to go on this weird, marginally relevant rant.

you're so sure that people here are merely jealous rather than spiteful at someone profiting off a system they correctly see as bullshit.

there is, actually, a difference between "hey, i want that!" and "hey, i could have had that if i were an amoral asshole. fuck this world."

of course they can both be stupid and counterproductive (particularly, the latter is just wrong), but it's a bit silly to use the same label for both.

it's garbage, trying to fill too many roles and full of bloat, though some of this is the publisher's fault.

either dumb it down some more, or use a better book like Apostol. either way, that goddam tome is an anachronistic brick. i fucking hated calculus in high school, yet wound up with a Ph.D. in applied math once i got real teachers and real books.

fuck hell, when did Apostol go up to $220? i thought it was ridiculously expensive when i bought it years ago...

not that i disagree with your point, but note that by claiming that statistic, you are implicitly assuming that i chose (or would choose) my spouse/partner at random from the sampled population and, even further, that i myself was chosen at random from that population. neither of those are even close to true.