Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:The obsession with DNS is stupid (Score 1) 55

I saw internet demonstrated in Europe 1980

I see. When you witnessed this demonstration, 46 years ago, did they mention anything about surveillance capitalism? How about online radicalization? Was the potential for the disruption of "community cohesion" brought up? We're there any thoughts shared on the matter of pirating copyrighted digital content? How much time did they spend on "digital sovereignty" and the future dominance of US based Big Tech over global data and communication?

I suspect not much. So perhaps we're not really discussing the same matter, are we?

Comment Re:The obsession with DNS is stupid (Score 0, Flamebait) 55

politicians are generally clueless

Europe is essentially incompatible with the internet. They never asked for it, and it's been nothing but trouble for Europe ever since it appeared. Had the clueless politicians you mention understood what it was at the time, they would have outlawed it immediately.

Comment Re:More uncanny, worse agents, allocated less (Score 1) 212

Yeah, it's not a good study. If nothing else (and there is much else) the sample size is too small.

OTOH, I find it difficult to understand why so many people seem to think it's "obviously wrong", when I would have predicted that result from a good study. People tend to be unreasonably biased, and not just about sex. There've been studies where two groups of people were divided at random. Those who ended up in each group tended to prefer their group over the other, even though the group didn't exist outside of the study. (I say that, but I don't know for sure that the folks didn't maintain their groups after the study was over...but it was a pretty short study.)

Comment Re:Figure 4: Our Data is Crap (Score 1) 212

That's a difference, it's just not a significant difference. It might well justify a larger study with more careful controls. But the result they produced is what I would have guessed, so I'm a bit biased.

Still, look at any sports team match. People tend to favor one side over the other for reasons that have nothing to do with skill.

Comment Re:Probably due to methodical errors (Score 1) 212

I'm sure that's happening. I'm also sure it's only a part of the story. Some of the other posts have raised other contributory issues, like image quality. And actually I think your point is a valid example of a more general trend, i.e. people tend to favor those who are more socially approved. The reasons for the social approval are nearly irrelevant, but different groups within society will use different measures. (E.g. Catholics will tend to approve of different people than Unitarians, even if they adopt the same proposals.) Think of how some people rate their favorites sports team vs. the way they rate the other side.

Comment Re:you cant be serious. (Score 2) 212

The study *is* flawed. The sample size is too small, and I doubt that the people tested replicate the world population average.

But it *is* "food for thought", and the result is the one I would have expected. People *do* tend to be biased in favor of the socially more approved of groups. (You don't need a study to prove that. Just read either the news or history, especially the history of a conflict.)

Slashdot Top Deals

A continuing flow of paper is sufficient to continue the flow of paper. -- Dyer

Working...