yes!

why? because people in China, Asia, and the Middle East (think rich Quataris) *absolutely love* our pointless opulent bullshit consumer products

Americans are, arguably, the most discriminating, least hype-driven of the wealthy classes of the world

this is where I disagree

people would **love** a good reason to buy this thing

as it is, it doesn't do shit, needs a damn iPhone5 to work, and steals your privacy

American consumers need more before they fork over the cash

if they learn to design this around user function first (instead of stealing biometric data) then they'll engineer something Americans will love

ianap but fluid dynamics is actually really interesting and relevant

everything behaves according to fluid dynamics principles...well...that's reductive but it's true for so many things including planets, light waves and typewriters

was it wind or water?

was it liquid water or water vapor?

see how the distinctions start to change?

this is about the recent "Mars had a huge ocean" news story...it was an easy pick for news editors, it's fun and has a cool graphic of an artists's conception of Mars with a huge ocean...i get it...

but it's all "fluid"...right?

your reasoning all makes sense

when people choose face-to-face, most (if they are like me) are thinking from a different criteria...**efficient discussion that gets things accomplished**

email discussions can be good for efficient discussion compared to in person when available, but so much information is lost it often causes more misunderstanding than decisiveness

this is what i've been digging lately for computer work...it has no words but is not 'ambient' proper...if you want to get technical, this sub-genre is known as 'chillwave':

http://comtruise.bandcamp.com/

here is the link with samples (named after colors a bit down the page): http://mtcb.pwop.com/

it's basically music similar to what you'd hear in an elevator or while on hold with tech support

i encourage everyone to listen and tell me what you think...if you like it, buy it...this is one man's (correct) opinion

users in the USA have different privacy and control expectations.

the **actual technology** to make mobile payments has been around for at least 20 years, approx.

it's about unscrupulous business people in dense organizations "implement" it as a "solution" on a cost/profit basis...

if US banks and other big biz would just stop forever with the notion of sucking user data for services this would all end very quickly

we have the tech to make it secure

I skateboard or walk to work usually.

good points

it comes down to 'case study' data vs interval numberic data

sales is easy to quantify

quality of art however....also, there is a novelty aspect as well, music listeners seeking out novel and "unknown" artists because they like to find new things

"critics picks" can be all over the place

I like these kinds of questions, but one thing researchers have difficulty accounting for is the difference between the music people listen to and what the Billboard Top 100 chart says.

Defining "pop music" as whatever is on the Billboard Top 100, especially now, is reductive. I understand it's quantifiable and that's the best idea they had for a quantitative definition of pop. However, Billboard's charts are virtually irrelevant when trying to ascertain what people **actually listen to by choice**

Obviously, record companies try to game the system but in the last 30 years they using NASA level science (or attempting to) to control every aspect of the music in ways no one thought of before.

Also: digital music production and software has made "pop" music so mass produced and generic you get things like the Nickleback debacle

I'm not trying to be over-critical of the researcher's methods. I'm sure they did the best they could, but these points are important to understand when investigating this kind of thing.

agree

I'm 100% in favor of strict NSA accountability, but it's wrong to blame the NSA as if they aren't at least partially working for the right reasons.

Blame hackers, oligarchs, and wannabe international gangsters first and foremost. The NSA must be held accountable with hardcore oversight, but we need law enforcement and defense.

Also, the tone of this article is weird, it seems to put China as some kind of arbiter of global trade ethics:

China's government is a totalitarian, freedom depriving monolith. The people of China are victims.

I see the angle, when we put spyware in tech like this there are consequences and it's probably overreach by the NSA, but TFA is criticizing from the wrong angle.

China is not a threat to us. That's the core misunderstanding. How many books, blog posts, articles by Thomas Friedman have there been about the "China Rising" nonsense? We don't owe China like a bank...they ***invested in the US*** by buying our bonds...you don't invest in something you are trying to destroy.

China's financial sovlency depends on the US's ability to honor our bonds. They hitched their wagons to our economy.

Also, China is a pollution wasteland. Human and chemical. Their disasterous one child policy has ruined the population balance of a generation and they have to run their city marathons in smog so thick it's visible at ground level.

I want the US to be a good influence on China. I want our policies to promote them making the right decisions for their people.

I also did a research study on the effectiveness of a "Abstinence Only" sex-ed message in high schools in Indiana for the Indiana Department of Health.

I wrote the study and devised the research design.

Guess what the results were???

The info was presented to the IN Dept of Health who replicated the survey in schools all over the state. I used it as my Master's thesis. Published only in conference proceedings, but we presented it several times for rooms full of doctors and public health experts.

Not as good as Hawking, eh?

I think we should be able to criticize theories and that criticism can be based on logic more than courtroom-style evidence.

I reject the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy at the core of many criticisms, including yours.

my main contribution, in my wildest dreams, is to put out a new theory of Cybernetics which reconciles both 1st Order (Weiner) and 2nd Order Cybernetics

3rd order Cybernetics

Cybernetics is typically defined as 'the study of control in biological life and machines" and a new theory could revitalize Computer Science (which is bogged down by the Church-Turing model of computation) and also has applications in virtually all areas of design.

Cybernetics also involves Information Theory, especially Claude Shannon's contributions.

I'd really like to get a clear statement of Cybernetic theory that can apply consistently across all the disciplines that Cybernetics touches. From interaction design to information theory cosmology.

I think it would be a breath of fresh air and provide a point of departure to try many new theories.

i totally didn't mean it that way!

yeah i feel he was treated unfairly for his "I don't understand women" comment a few years back

i agree the media are idiots in general and especially when reporting about science