Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Won't do any good. (Score 1) 264

by a whoabot (#46485711) Attached to: Cameras On Cops: Coming To a Town Near You

The results show that use of force and complaints are down. How is that the "exact opposite" of his theory? Maybe most of the complaints that were prevented would have been frivolous. Maybe most of the use of force that stopped would have been appropriate: I.e., the cameras cause those interacting with the police to behave better. Maybe most of the abuse is intentional: If that's the case, then there is nothing strange about hypothesis that the police intending to be abusive would also intend to turn off the cameras when they intend to be abusive.

There's no reason to assume that he "ignores real evidence".

Comment: Re:Maybe, but... (Score 1) 246

by a whoabot (#45572731) Attached to: Piracy Offers Heavy Metal a New Business Model

Power go out on the autotune? Power is more likely to go out on the mains than on the outboard, and no large show is happening without those.

You know that the stage flash and gimmicks of Iron Maiden are partly what Spinal Tap is mocking, right? They are not known for the quality their music, but for their bombast in both the music and the stage show. Many acts will play with a single dim light and sit down in some chairs and just play their songs. Iron Maiden brings out lasers, fog, sets, costumes, pyrotechnics; they are an Insane Clown Posse antecedent. Iron Maiden's only number one was called "Bring Your Daughter to the Slaughter" which became famous almost solely for its shock value.

Comment: Re:No Big Mystery (Score 1) 372

by a whoabot (#45217411) Attached to: Wikipedia's Participation Problem

It's been over 2 hours now. Still no reversion of my edits. And these were done with an IP address, which has the highest chance of being scrutinized and reverted. Over 500 users have the page on their watchlists (source, and the page is viewed between 2000 and 5000 times a day source, making it ranked 3496th in traffic, out of over 4 million articles, therefore making it in the top 1% of most viewed articles.

Comment: Re:No Big Mystery (Score 1) 372

by a whoabot (#45215915) Attached to: Wikipedia's Participation Problem

So I did your test. Here are my edits: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ren%C3%A9_Descartes&diff=578441915&oldid=578411787 It's been over 15 minutes now from the last edit, and no reversion from a bot or a user. Although I don't doubt that a user reading this will now come on to revert just to make a point. Perhaps you could show your results so that we can see what you actually changed?

Comment: Re:I'm confused (Score 1) 516

by a whoabot (#45074353) Attached to: Administration Admits Obamacare Website Stinks

I am in Canada and I can tell you that Health Canada does indeed decide not to cover expensive treatments. My father is a physician and director at a hospital in Ontario. Here's an example he has spoken to me about: Someone in critical condition needs to be transferred to the regional hospital for surgery, transferring by air ambulance (helicopter) is far more likely to save their life than going by road. If the person is old, a drunkard, etc. they are not likely to receive such treatment. If they are young, employed, have young children, they are likely to receive the air lift. Decisions like this are made every day. Medical professionals in Canada have a duty to keep costs down, as there are not infinite resources. Anyway, you can see why costs can be less but outcomes better given such actions: If the distribution of medical treatment more closely follows the distribution of wealth, then costs can be higher, as the wealthy would be willing/able to pay more, and there is no connection between one's having money and the aptness of one's treatment to be a marginal benefit to the average outcome/cost ratio. Indeed, wealthy Canadians often go to the US for medical treatment where their money can buy them something.

Comment: Re:Human eye (Score 1) 414

by a whoabot (#44448779) Attached to: Are We At the Limit of Screen Resolution Improvements?

Completely ridiculous. You've taken "angular resolution" to mean "angular pixel spacing". You would need more than one pixel for every 4 arcminutes in order to have an angular resolution of 4 arcminutes.

http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html has a review of material which shows that the pixel spacing required would be around 0.3 to 0.4 arcminutes, a far cry from 4.

Comment: Re:scientific literacy along with general educatio (Score 1) 315

by a whoabot (#43322601) Attached to: Does Scientific Literacy Make People More Ethical?

One might argue a lot of things, but that does not mean that one is right. A sound argument which is tautological is still a sound argument. And one could argue that that is as assumption as well, but that also does not mean that one right. It is not an assumption: It's a logical truth. It cannot possibly be not-true.

I don't miss such a distinction. I can reach an absolute conclusion of "torture is wrong" while having the condition "if". Having that "if" does not mean my strongest conclusion is "if X, then torture is wrong". Proceeding from conditional to absolute does not require taking up the assumption "X = true". Indeed, this last point is partly what Kant showed in the first Critque by establishing the possibility of transcendental philosophy.

1. Deduction A implies that X is true.
2. Deduction A is sound.
3. If X, then torture is wrong.
Therefore, 4. Torture is wrong.

There is no assumption X is true. QED: There is an absolute conclusion of "torture is wrong", while having a condition "if", and no assumption that X is true.

Comment: Re:scientific literacy along with general educatio (Score 1) 315

by a whoabot (#43321525) Attached to: Does Scientific Literacy Make People More Ethical?

The argument is sound within an assumed framework and also within any framework. It's entirely sound. You cannot show me any logician of any level of pedantry who would deny that if X then X.

Even if you can't reach conclusions about external conditions "X" without the condition "if", that does not in any way imply that you can never logically argue to an absolute conclusion like "torture is wrong", because there is nothing preventing you from arguing logically while using the condition "if".

Comment: Re:scientific literacy along with general educatio (Score 1) 315

by a whoabot (#43321257) Attached to: Does Scientific Literacy Make People More Ethical?

I'm not assuming there is an X.
I'm not assuming X doesn't change.
I'm not sure what the question means. I'm not calling anything X and I don't claim that anything is called X, can be called X, or anything else about the topic of calling things X.

You think it suffices for what?

Comment: Re:scientific literacy along with general educatio (Score 1) 315

by a whoabot (#43321111) Attached to: Does Scientific Literacy Make People More Ethical?

Not every logical argument begins with assumptions, so how could I forget something which I know to be false? Take an argument:
1. If X then X.
2. If X then X.
Therefore, 3. If X then X.

This argument is sound and no assumption is made.

" If you don't accept his assumptions, stated or otherwise, his argument is meaningless. " Please, demonstrate this: Which assumptions, if I deny them, does his argument become meaningless? And in what way exactly is his argument meaningless if I deny these assumptions?

Comment: Re:scientific literacy along with general educatio (Score 3, Insightful) 315

by a whoabot (#43320469) Attached to: Does Scientific Literacy Make People More Ethical?

Kant showed why such things are objectively wrong almost 200 years ago. It's just that very few people have the patience to read the first and second critiques, the Groundwork and the Metaphysics of Morals, so most people are ignorant of this advancement in ethics.

In particular look at the second formulation of the Categorical Imperative in the Groundwork. A morally-correct maxim necessarily assumes a respect for other people's autonomy. Torturing someone for fun completely undermines any such respect.

Man must shape his tools lest they shape him. -- Arthur R. Miller

Working...