Comment Re:Nobody cares about the COP-out conferences (Score 1) 184
Now please, judge me for a typo!
You'd be right if it weren't for the fact that most countries pass legislation as a result of the conferences....
Blah, blah, blah, you're literally just repeating the same hot-air and toady-ing the gov't line.
Call me when those things actually accomplish something other than allowing government boot-lickers to say: "look we tried!"
Republicans
LOL I'm Canadian, not that it's any of your business, but I usually vote Green, and have never voted Conservative
Swing and a miss their buddy!
I just saw an ad for this new Indiana Jones video game - and it couldn't have been more uncannily clear that they'd deepfaked Harrison Ford's voice for the narration voice-over.
They couldn't make it sound more like a Harrison Ford Robot if they tried... yikes!!!
Yes it's not fair that third world countries are being asked to not do what first world countries did to become wealthy...
Hold on. There aren't any countries left that the third world can loot, exploit and steal from...
They gonna invade Alpha Centauri?
No one clicks a webpage hoping to learn which cat can haz cheeseburger.
Well, uh, shit... what am I doing here? I guess I'll be on my way then?!?
... the idea of taxing based on net worth (aka wealth tax.)
Not so bad
The real story would be behind how someone so stupid got entrusted with $6 million dollars in the first place
My guess is somebody's daddy.
Perception is very important when you're dealing with human behaviour.
Agreed, but if you are trying to determine whether blue light keeps you awake or not, and you shine blue filtered light on a bunch of subjects, they all get sleepy, but everyone of them reports "perceiving" blue light - then your study is entirely fucking useless.
Anyway, that's not what they did.
No? Well, the reporting is shit then (no surprise there)
The actual experiment used light that was calibrated to have the same effect on the ganglion cells while having different short and long frequency content.
Really? LOL That's even worse ! Do these people even know what they are doing?
If the ganglion cell outputs were their dependent variables, but they arranged their study so that their dependent variable was actually FIXED (and therefore NOT "dependent" AT ALL) across all possible independent variable values (light frequency balance impinging on the rods/cone photoreceptors), then they have literally done nothing at all
The retinal ganglion cells integrate the signals of the rods/cones. Once you get to the ganglion layer, whatever the photoreceptor inputs were no longer matter, because they've been integrated together to produce the ganglion output.
They limited their study from the start to only comparing inputs that produced the same output - and then tried to claim that changes to their inputs don't produce changes in their output...
This is quite beyond stupid.
Machines do not "learn". Seriously, stop claiming insightless crap.
You sir, are an idiot.
I've studied human learning and machine learning in grad school as part of my MSc in Cognitive Psych. We actually compared the learning parameters and curves between humans and machines on various learning and memory tasks.
By any non-stupid definition: machines definitely CAN learn, to the point they can display some of the same memory artifacts and distortions as people do. I know this because I have DONE this. You have nothing but ignorance to base your statement on.
You are so outrageously false as to be "not even wrong"
Somehow I doubt there's an evolutionary pathway where the light signalling would be restricted to a particular frequency range of visible light.
I'm not saying I believe it, but it's not that far fetched an idea.
The proportion of different frequencies of light getting refracted/reflected by the atmosphere changes with the angle of incidence of the light.
Blue is one of the dominant frequencies during the day (to verify look at sky during day).
All of our photoreceptors only respond to specific frequency ranges.
Specialization of function along those lines should not come as a surprise.
None of the analyses revealed any indication that the perceived color of the light affected the duration or quality of the volunteers' sleep patterns.
Srsly, WTF. Do people not know how to properly design experiments now?
Why the F would you conduct this study using self-reported values as one of the independent variables?!?!?
JFC - they know the frequency mix of light they were using!!! Just use that for FFS!!!! Self-reported "perceptions" are notoriously garbage input
Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky
