angryprofessor

6 ms·

1.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
So you are proposing that chemicals cause aggresion in rats, and aggression in humans, but for a different reason? Seems unlikely to me. Double blind experiments do show causation (ignoring metaphysical discussions). There are 3 possibiliti
2.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>Empirical observations show that chemicals have some correlation with emotions, which does not imply that either causes the other. Timing and randomization shows that chemicals are the cause. Double blind experiments must have been don
3.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
Ideas could cause aggression, certainly. Lots of things can. However, we DO know chemicals can in humans. Pot and ecs reduce aggression, while meth increase it. I don't know if particular mechanisms are understood, I'm not a biochemist. But
4.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>I, and a majority of my friends, are in favor of the war. I'm not opposed to it either (1). I guess I'm assuming you live on the coast; if you do, it's very surprising if you know multiple people who favored the war. Regardless, my poi
5.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
No offense, but I'm 99% convinced you've never had a girlfriend. Here is a blog that has links to lots of quantitative evidence. http://www.overcomingbias.com/ For more anecdotal evidence, ask your female friends why they support Hillary
6.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
The best explanation I've seen for the disparities within science is reasoning/mathematical ability. String theory ( ) requires the most (all difficult math), experimental condensed matter requires much less. By the way, I should have menti
7.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>...So, for example, suppose culture contains a trigger which causes parents to be more discouraging of one type of children's book than another, for girls. ... I could consider such explanations plausible for explaining gender gaps bet
8.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>It's easy to make up and describe a cultural factor that would explain the data. For example, the previous shift was about how adult women were treated in public -- open discrimination. The second shift will come when parents (and othe
9.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>So I don't know specifically why it is that parents, and others, discourage girls from business and technical areas in particular. Not only technical areas, but also particular technical areas. What makes experimental physics less tech
10.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
> And in particular, it is more repressive of females, and cripples their ability to think more, especially in business and technical areas. Why business and technical areas in particular? Historically, I'd agree with you. But that effe
11.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
It's not clear cut, mainly due to a lack of useful data. I don't know much about the labor market in the UK (your link only discusses employment/unemployment in 2007, not the effects of minimum wage in 1998), but I'll discuss the US. In the
12.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>But, as far as I know, there are none in the city limits of Chicago and New York. This isn't because wealthy people don't want to shop there. In both NY and Chicago, unions and their lackeys on the city council didn't allow walmart int
13.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>Before replying, please make extra sure that your argument works for women, but not children. That's a very good point, one that I've made in the past. If you try it with a slightly less intelligent crowd than YC, you will get the foll
14.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>The rate of suicide is high among Grad/PhD students because they have to "think outside the box" every single day. They have to find a "breakthrough". That's really not true, though many grad students (especially in physics) think it i
15.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
One important fact you miss (and the author missed also). All US bonds are dollar denominated assets. The dollar was hugely overvalued (and still is, but less), as a direct result of China (and others) buying all this debt. By the time we
16.
Lush: Lisp Universal SHell (Lisp designed for numerical analysis)(lush.sourceforge.net)
5 points by angryprofessor 19y ago|1 comments
17.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
I'm hostile to colleges (and recruiters), though I don't think I count as anti-intellectual (my job is basic research). My reason for opposing colleges (and recruiters) is simple: colleges/recruiters are middlemen sitting between you and th
18.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
It's true that we were the world leader once upon a time. From the 20's to the early 40's, we had a major competitive advantage: our factories didn't explode much, whereas European and Japanese factories did. In the late 30's and early 40
19.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
What companies get is a good chunk of the infrastructure is funded by the public. Most labs get big chunks of money from the government, which funds basic research. As a result of this funding, the lab exists and people are trained in the b
20.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
There are certainly no problems with supervised recounts. Look how well they go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_gubernatorial_electi... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elec... http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
21.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
I agree with you, to a point. But lets not ignore the drawbacks of paper voting: a bunch of old ladies counting paper ballots can have error rates approaching 1%. Better electronic systems are possible. In NJ, we have an electronic machine
22.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
You might try looking for controversy. I've thought about this more for reddit/slashdot comments than for polls, but here are my ideas: For comments on a point based site (such as reddit, this site if it gets popular), there are signs that
23.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
For 4, try Calculus on manifolds, then Differential Geometry (both by Michael Spivak).
24.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
Some of the many worlds variants make sense. I prefer bohmian mechanics (I can reason about it better), but I have no objection to MW. Ultimately I don't care one way or the other: the predictions for MY universe are the same, whether or no
25.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>Universes do not split like that. That would mean many universes were being created from nothing every instant. What actually happens is there are already infinitely many "universes" and they become different. And not one per outcome,
26.
by angryprofessor 19y ago
>So if you're still feeling guilty, target some investment money in saving time for scientists -- all scientists. If you could save them a few hours each week, imagine how much value you could add? One very useful webapp would be a pers