Prometheus98876
-
Posts
1340 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by Prometheus98876
-
-
I'm not sure who you have in mind here, but I'll bet that most or all of them went through earlier programs run by Leonard Peikoff or Harry Binswanger. I know of no Objectivist intellectuals doing good work who haven't gone through such programs.
Some of them did , I grant you t his. But I am not talking about just "Objectivist intellectuals", assuming you mean people that specialize in academic study of Objectivism. If this is who you were talking about ( which did not seem that clear?), then there is less to argue about.
-
For sure, it is pretty much essential if you want a really , really deep academic understanding of Objectivism. Granted, I guess if you got like everything from the Ayn Rand Bookstore or something and studied your ass off, you might be able to replace the OAC in terms of learning much the same stuff. I seriously doubt that this is feasible and I suspect you would have to be very, very intelligent.
If you are a philosophy major, I guess it could be about as useful too. I bet a really deep understanding of Objectivism makes one a much better philosophy major
Note I have not been to the OAC ( as of yet ). Maybe one day I will attend? But I do know others that have, and they have all loved it. So yeah if you are interested and can fit it in : *Highly* suggested in general, if you have a lot of academic interest in such things.
-
If you plan to be some sort of intellectual or academic, OAC is a must. Understanding Objectivism is hard and a lot of work. Getting to the level of understanding required to be an intellectual is probably impossible without some kind of expert guidance. If that's your goal, you'd have to figure a way to make it work some how. The time commitment is equivalent to a college course. Weekly seminars and readings, papers, etc.
Nope, this is just wrong. If you want to be an Objectivist philosopher or academic, then yeah I would say that this is pretty much a must. But if you want to be an intellectual in some other field, I see no reason to beleive that one *has* to do this course to succedd and do very well. I think that if you look you will find a lot of intellectuals that are also Objectivists have not done this course. Yet many oif them have a good to excellent grasp of Objectivism and are reasonably successfull within their feilds.
Having said that, if they had done the course : Who knows if they would be doing even better or by how much. It is definitely a helpful course to take , if it s a realistic option.
-
I am glad to hear that the last part of my little rant there proved to be ...well just a rant I guess
Whatever the reasons for these bugs are : Lets hope someone figures something out. Did they say anything about whether the themes might be partially to blame? It might be something they should consider... -
Yes, that was my point, but add to that, the fact that someone took the trouble to move the thread, not to "overcoming superstition", or "deciding whether the OP's a troll" or at the very least the already existing section of "Psychology"; but instead to US Domestic Policy.
I tremble to think that strange apparitions influence U.S. Domestic Policy. Maybe there IS a ghost here- not of the metaphysical variety.
re/brian; not joking, just the fact that "she" was the same user who felt somehow prosecuted for being slavic in a white town... and for being bullied at 13.
It's just disturbing that ghostbusting is taken this seriously while my threads are pretty much ignored.
I was being sarcastic, obviously.
What do those other things she was worried about have to do with this? So she has other *possible* insecurities or something? That just proves that maybe there is a trend here or or something I guess ( I am not commenting either way). Not that the number of replies here is weird.
Ah yes, your "aspects" of Ayn Rand. Maybe it is just possible that at this point we do not have a lot of reason to take you seriously. At least while DreamSpirit might be confused on a number of issues, she has ( at least in my opinion and I guess in the opinion of some others here ) seemed to make some effort to understand things said to her and to think rationally about them.
Anyway, I think I am done with making this even longer.
-
I did laim it was a moot point if you use your phone intelligently, at least as far as I can tell. Maybe it is a weakness of the platform, I never denied the possibility that this is so. I simply said that if so, not necceasirly for the reasons you think. But even if so, it is not a weakness which should necceasirly be an issue. Unless perhaps one is not very sure how to go about avoiding malware or it is much less obvious than I seem to think. I mean maybe *shrug*.
Though I do agree that basing a purchasing decision just off a drop test is not a good idea. I mean, not unless all you plan to do is try bounce your phone down the road. Though for some people this is an important issue to consider. For like clumsy / careless people or people that for some other reason are likely to drop their phone? Hehe...I know I have dropped a lot of phones over the years. Though they have all come through pretty much unscathed. The video does not mention what sort of warranty the iPhone has, or if this sort of thing is covered and in what way. Without this kind of info, the drop test seems to lose some of its usefullness.
We do seem to be talking past each other, yeah. I do wish to make it clear ( not sure that I really need to ) that none of this stuff is meant to be an attack on Apples phones per say or to say that Androids phones are better for everyone. That is silly, obviously Apple phones are better suited to what some people want. For reasons I probably do not fully appreciate. It is pretty cool that you seem so passionate about iPhones, even if I do not seem to appreciate why exactly.
Heard some good things about the Fire. Seems like a pretty decent little device, certainly when you consider the price, which as I recall is pretty low. Given what I have heard about other Kindles and what Amazon seem to be saying, I guess we casn be sure the Kindle Fire will have good battery life. MIght even beat your iPhone in that respect
-
I never said it was evidence. It is pretty clear that I think the Android App store is better for what *I* and many other pepole want to use it for . Or it not better, at least of sufficent quality for this not to be a very big issue.
It would not be a rationalization. It would the the recoginition of the that fact that even *if* it has the issue you accuse it of, that it does not really mattter [much[ if you use tthe thing wisely. You say you wont drop the iPhone. Shall I accuse you of retaionaliziing cause you seem think that an alleged ( and actually demonstrated) weakness ( ie the fact that it is clearly more physically fragile in some respects ) is something you have no reason to be very concerned about?
-
Yeah, it is pretty strange that lots of people on *this* forum of all places woud respond to an extremely bizarre thread like this . Definitely an inordinate number of replies.
Or not , sarcasm aside. -
A gimmick?
Rather than argue the many uses of having video recording capabilities (preferably with decent quality) handily present on a phone, let me provide a link to a clip shot with the 4S and you can judge if this is "gimmick" quality video.
http://embed.shortfo...o-footage-1080p
Be sure to set the player's resolution to 1080 and go full screen to get the full appreciation of the quality of this video.
Fair enough, you can dismiss my anecdotal evidence.... but I don't have to. It's always difficult to accept someone else's experiences in place of you own.
I did not say it had a gimmicky quaity. In fact, it probably looks great I did however imply that 1080p is probably something far in excess of what most potential customers want or necceasirly need from their iPhone. Especially as I doubt many people would gain much benefit over 720p, which still allows for really great videos I would think. Maybe this is more valued than I realize, but I am struggling to see why many people woulde care that much when 720p seems as though it would give people what they wanted already.
What " anectedoal evidence"? You did not give any, you just made vague comparative statements about battery life. You gave me completely insufficent reason to make much of a useful conclusion.
As for why Android has more malware currently on it : Its not that it is Open Source as such. It has more to do with the fact it has a significantly larger market share, sol more people bother creating malware for it. EVen Mac OS X would be drowning in malware if enough creators of such things cared ( especially as pre Lion anwyay, the OS is horribly insecure anyway). In any case, I have seen no definite evidence to support whether Android or Apple phones are more or less vulnerable to such. Only that more has been createde on one of the platforms. Even if the Android is more vulnerable : This is moot if you practise sensible web surfiing / app installiont policies etc. Not a singlee Android user I have heard of that uses their phone in this manner has ever had an issue. Just as I never get malware on my computer.
I dont see how the link really proves the Apple App Store is better. it is kind of vague in places and does not really explain the criteria used in sufficent depth. Though sure, stuff comes out first ande the author thinks it is more polished. Maybe Android has apps which more people will find more useful though? The article does not really say much of much use. Not having tried the Apple App Store, I would certainly not wish to venture a definite opinion.
-
1080p videoi camera? Meh, this sounds like more a gimmick than a camera resolution most potential customers have any real use for. Granted some people will find this pretty handy though for whatever reason, and that is great news for them.
As for Android phone battery life : This varies. Different models of Android phones have better or worse batteries. Some batteries are not so good, while the ones used by some devices last ages and some apparently outlast iPhone batteries. It is really depends on the manufacturer and I think Android itself has little real influence ( unless the software itself is somehow wasteful of the battery in some way I am not aware of ).
Also, dont forget that how long your battery lasts between charges depends * a lot* on how you *use* your phone. Maybe you do not use your iPhone for as many battery draining t hings as these people you are hearing about, for all I know. This is why proffessional reviewers do the same tests , doing the same thing each time, when testing battery life. They usually watch videos and such until it runs out. But whatever it is, the point is to perform repeatable tests that give a fair comparision between the real-world battery life of various devices. Though some of them will also test it not using video and more like what they think the average user wil do with it, possibly giving a figure which matches how long many can expect the battery to last.
Hell, even the condition of the battery can have a big influence on how long you can go between charges. Batteries of this type hold less charge as the battery starts to wear out, and *heat* wears these types of batteries out. Guess what heats the battery? Using it and even just charging it. Leaving your phone plugged into the charger for too long can make your battery wear out much faster for instance, also resulting in reduced charge capacity.
So yeah, might want to be careful when comparting the battery life of these devices.
-
Um..yes? Or maybe not, maybe the fact that it was around Halloween made her pay more attention to that article, or think more about such things. Who really knows. What is your point?
-
Hhm, I think the Android sale figures were for Anroid devieces in general, not specifically Samsung Android. Though how fair is this really, when Android is available on a hell of a lot of different hardware platforms, from hundredsof venders. But in any case , was not aware that for whatever reasons Samsung alone be ahead. Interesting to see how the 4S will change either comparison though.
-
I'll mention that I may be particularly sensitive on this topic, perhaps Apple in general. For quite a while now, many people have argued the inferiority of Apple products while Apple has continued to increase sales in nearly all of its products. The iPhone was supposed to be a flop, the iPad was supposed to be a flop, etc. etc. Invariably, "tech heads" attribute this to Apple's marketing ability, NOT the idea that people are actually buying a product that they think best serves their uses. This gets old and Apple has (thus far) continued to show these folks the error of their thinking.
Prometheus, you suggest that most people are concerned with hardware specs, but I'm not convinced. I contend that must people are concerned with interface, ease of use, ease of interoperability, and other things that don't require them to be ubergeeks in order to use their device. Specs are a consideration on a very rudimentary level, but in my experience, the only people who really examine the hardware specs are those who are technically inclined to an above average level (ubergeeks).
I would offer that SIRI is potentially a game changer, if not in this iteration, then the next. It really is something you should experience before deciding its actual utility and practicality. The thing that distinguishes it from typical voice recognition/voice command is the presence of servers that "learn" or improve functionality over time as people use it more. The voice recognition is as accurate, if not moreso than any other I've seen and its ability to understand natural language is at times uncanny. Should SIRI catch on as much as I suspect, one article I read suggested that Android is probably two years out in catching up to SIRI technology.
Consider one example, though I could give many. You are driving into a new area and you are interested in Chinese food. In one instance you can pull over (or attempt to continue driving) while pulling up the map app and typing in "chinese" or "chinese restaurant" and then hitting search. Alternatively, you can just put the iPhone up to your ear and say, "I wanna eat Chinese" and get the same result. The may seem simple at first but it is much easier (and safer). Yes, there is a small degree of learning your voice, but I've found it to be very accurate when I dictate text messages to it. I can Tweet and update my Facebook status verbally just like I was dictating a text. The only thing that makes it "difficult" is simply not doing it the way I'm used to... typing out things, in other words breaking a habit.
This isn't even considering Apple's recent acquisition of mapping technology that may again separate it from its competitors.
Ok, I grant Siri may or may not work a lot better than other similar software applications. All I know is that these things can be problematic and that some people seem to think it does not work that well. *shrug* . Lets say that perhaps their reports may be misleading to some extent, I dont know. If it does indeed work as well as you seem to think / suggest : Great, Apple have done a good job and in this case it cannot have been easy.
No, I do not seem to suggest most people are concerned with hardware specs. Only that some / many I have seen *are*, even though for most people it does not really matter too much ( yes for some it does matter more, I concede that). I do agree that the other things you mention are more important generally, even if I do not personally agree Apple does all of that stuff in the best way for what I want.
Though, I am fairly sure you can at least try all of those things on software available on Android etc. I could not say how well it actualy works though, as really I have no need for such features generally. If you do though and Siri does what you want, that is great. Maybe the Android versions woudlnt work so well, I dont know for sure either way.
I dont know what this complaining about "people not buying what they need" is about exactly and why you bothered mentioning it gets "old". I said not everyone necceasirly needs phones with really fast processors etc. I did not accuse anyone in particular of not buying according to what they need, though I did imply it does / can happen. So what is your point exactly?
And unless I am behind : Apple is still outsold by Android at the moment anyway. This is not really a judgement upon Apple or anything, but it is a fact, unless I am mistaken as I said. Though I do think it probably suggests Android may be more in line with what more people want.
Also none of this is an attack on Apple or me saying "Apple sucks", or "dont buy Apple stuff". Quite the contrary : If Apple offers what you care about / need at the right price : Go for it. I just do not really care for their offerings much myself, not at the prices *I* have to pay. Nor do a lot of Android users and other people. Though how many of them are making well informed / rational choices : I could not be too certain. But how many Apple users are much better? Couldnt say that either.
-
I too thought some of the things were pretty off for even an impersonation of her, and I figured they were slanting some of the things she said and making fun of her to make her look bad, however, I do think that this may have been something that actually happened.
These two quotes are things that sound very much like something she might say:
I hear every word from these imbeciles and I have reached the point where I can no longer allow it to happen. Nobody else has spoken up to these people, so I took it upon myself to speak up and say to them, that which needs to be said.
Objectivism is a moral code and not a permission slip for amoral destruction.
With all the people out there using objectivism incorrectly for some kind of libertoonian tool I would think this might be something she would want to clarify if she had an idea of what was happening and could be interviewed. I don't think she would say things so goofy in the other two responses though, even in a very casual interview. How could someone even come up with the idea for this for the purpose of a stupid satire joke? I wonder if you could contact the actual people who supposedly witnessed it and ask them if they are really serious.
So, because you think that those quotes sound like something you think she would say, you are assuming it is probably her? Even though there is evidence that it probably is not her ( such as the totally out of character quotes ) and it is far more likely to be some sort of spoof/hoax? Sorry, that makes no sense.
Maybe the author simply knows enough about Ayn Rand to create a few pretend quotes from her that do sound authentic.
As for how someone could up with this a joke : I dont know. But the fact that you cannot think of reason for someone doing thiks => assuming it probably is not, smacks of something like the old "Appeal from incredulity" logical fallacy. You are assuming this stuff is too fantastic to be faked, therefore it isnt. But that is not valid reasoning sorry.
-
This bears all the stylistic hallmarks of satire. Notice the focus on Rand's well known traits, such as the fact that she smoked.
And this supports the satire/spoof theory too.
-
Yeah, it is not even a very good spoof. Ayn Rand just was not to my knowledge the sort to say this kinde of thing ( or at leastt to worde things in this manner). Why woulde her "ghost" be different? :
"AR: Greenspan! Please - darling boy, do not talk to me about that panty sniffer. He was always trying to bed me. I even caught him stealing my panties from my luggage. Does he talk about that, when he is recommending my book? I will bet not. He is maybe the biggest Looter of them all. I abhor Central Banks as anyone who reads my work for 10 minutes can tell you."
Yeah, not something she would say. Yeah, you imply she might be speaking in a way that might normally be out of character, but this is just as arbitrary as the assertion that this is her in the first place.
I agree that the site is probably some sort of crazy spoof. That and the site is generally very badly written anyway. It should not fool anyone, though I do not think it is meant to,
-
Siri sounds great "on paper", but such technologies are rarely, if ever ,implemented in a way which is really all that useful in anything but a handful of situations ( though granted it usually is reasonably handy in those situations). Then there are all the implications of what sort of problems the use of this sort of technology can cause ( for instance, does it respond to your voice only or other background voices/noises ). Then there is the issue of whether it works nearly as well as advertised in real-world situations.
Usually these things dont and they make it *harder* to perform the sort of things it is alleged it exists to make easier. I hope Siri is one of the few examples of this sort of software actuallly being useful in all but maybe a handful of cases the average person cares about. I have not used it, so I do not pretend to know either way.
I think ASUK is probably correct in pointing out that the Galaxy S2 is objectively speaking a superior device overall in terms of hardware ( in relation to what most people actually care about ). It might have a slower CPU and it might not be as graphically capable ( I would have to check the specs of the Galaxy, do not remember them offhand), but this is not really all that important to most customers for either device. People that buy smart*phones* generally have hardware needs that are easy meet by *most* decent /good Android phones. I would not be that concerned about the CPU or graphical processor speed of most phones, it is generally its actual performance and usefulness that is the issue, and CPU and graphical processor speeds usually have relatively little impact on smartphones ( tablets are another matter, but we are not talking about them).
Not to mention that Android has a vast array of apps, many of which are arguably superior to Apple ones, depending on what you want from your software.
Still, the Apple offering is not too bad I guess....though I would not pay the price they are bound to charge me here in NZ.
-
FeatherFall : I have had a little look at the link you provided. Until I have a much more in depth look at the thing and try to match it better with what I know , it is hard to say if it is "better" than the "Standard Model(s)". Though I notice that it too seems to reify time. Which is a major mistake modern physics as it is tends to make. In fact, as far as I can tell from a cursory glance, time is even more crucial to this theory than in many others.
When in fact, t ime is a measurement [ of motion] , a relational concept : http://aynrandlexico...xicon/time.html
Well, for better or worse, it is interesting anyway.
-
Yikes, that guy has almost no grasp of the true facts in regards to warfare, the philosophical roots of warfare or the morally proper response in order to those that initate such conflicts. If he did, he would not portray a morally courageous act as an act of barbarism.
Whereas I take the view that it was a truly moral act that saved far more lives than it has cost ( even to date ). NOT doing it would have been a comprimise to evil and an act of moral cowardice.
But yeah, this stuff is typical. Even amongst military historians / those that write about "war crimes" etc, there is very little understanding of the true nature of warfare of the principles behind what is or is not moral in such situations. Hell, military historians do not ( generally speaking ) even know how a war should be won properly ...
-
Well, according to those figures, the studio *might* be able to pay the $440,00 per actor per episode then. Though that is rather doubtful...
However, just because the studios might be willing to pay that much , does not mean that the work done is worth that much. Or that the actors are asking reasonable amounts for the work done. Which was really what I was driving at. Sure, they can get it, and they should try get the most they can get. Though I think there is a point at which they are asking for more than any objective assessment of their work says that their work is worth. Even IF the studios are willing to pay that amount anyway.
-
$250k per episode? For voice-acting? I am struggling to see how their work justifies anywhere near *that* , let alone the much higher figures that the voice-actors actually want.
Though this would not be the first time actors have demanded completely unreasonable pay-levels and ended up contributing to the death of a [formerly] good television series. Kelsey Grammar* and David Hyde Peirce were demanding and getting $1 million for each episode of Frasier. Despite the fact ratings were already falling by the time it ended.
* This by the way, was despite the fact that Grammar was employing an acting technique in which he read the lines, did one rehearsal by himself ( he refused to rehearse with the other actors ) and then did the live performance.
-
Not that it matters, but I found Wotan's metaphorical flourishes quite fun, and a good tribute to Jobs.
I have no problems with "soul" (nor did Rand) and I've been an atheist since..ah, you don't want to know.
Let's not be so literal, guys.
Hey, I use the word "soul" now and again. In a similar fashion to how Ayn Rand sometimes did. I have no issue with that word used in such a way. Though I do not think that was what he meant. It was generally not clear what he meant or if he was being serious or was not expecting us to take him very literally.
Though it was certainly a pretty fun tribute, I will give you that.
-
Yes, that is very touching, but that is not how reality works. Here is what justice is , according to Objectivism :
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/justice.html
Nothing to do with aliens or anyone else fulfilling your personal wishes or what you think Steven Job deserves. Nothing involving what happens after death, but only how people be treated while they are alive.
Sucks huh?
-
No, sorry none of your Ayn Rand quotes support that assertion.
And for your information I know *plenty* of QM. I just disagree with many of the interpretation/theories contained within it.
Why are there so few females in engineering and tech fields?
in Engineering & Technology
Posted
Well, firstly stats do not necceasirly prove anything. Actually, stats alone never prove anything. At best they can be used to support a valid inductive argument or to help one argue a certain point / to induce from stats to some valid argument.
Are you trying to imply that one needs an obsession with being right / vindicated in order to succedd in engineering / tech fields? An *obession* ? I simply do not see how this is true if one takes this literally, maybe we are not meant to. I am not entirely sure what you *do* intend to imply. Sure one should be concerned with being right in any field, no matter what gender they are. This is clearly not really that gender dependent. Men might worry *more* about it (maybe), however I know plenty of women that are sufficently concerned about his to be motivated to do their job well.