thribbler

5 ms·

1.
by thribbler 16y ago
>systematic explanation Yes. Too many scientists aren't trying to explain things; rather they wander around looking for new correlations. There's an abundant supply of correlations wherever one looks.
2.
by thribbler 16y ago
>spend time learning other things on your own Hear Hear! And all learning is done on one's own, really. IQ is, not to put too fine a point on it, bunk. Grades are also bunk. They can never measure depth of knowledge, which is the th
3.
by thribbler 16y ago
I agree. The problem with these kind of studies is that they aren't coming up with explanations and then trying to test them; they're simply looking for correlations, which advances knowledge not one jot. In the case of caffeine I suspect t
4.
by thribbler 16y ago
Or you could invest in an electric blanket. As a bonus you will get more sleep in winter (because it takes time for your body to warm the bed otherwise).
5.
by thribbler 16y ago
Taking children seriously is good. http://www.takingchildrenseriously.com/
6.
by thribbler 16y ago
Paying people to leave actually sounds like quite a good idea to me. Pay people 3 months salary to leave; don't pay new employees for the first 3 months. It's much easier to identify an underperforming existing employee than to pick the bes
7.
by thribbler 16y ago
>but if your virtual fence is 3 to 5 meters high, it can catch almost all mosquitoes that fly by Yeah...it's never going to work unless they eliminate all the bugs.
8.
by thribbler 16y ago
Genes don't know about tattoos. Maybe memes do?
9.
by thribbler 16y ago
A question about PC gaming. It can be irritating to have to keep the game disc inserted in order to play, even after the install. One reason is that children frequently empty the drive trays and discs can quickly get scratched. Is there a w
10.
by thribbler 16y ago
>The good news is that smart and effective actions are possible I'm not sure how relevant this is but my impression is that many or most environmentalists oppose both nuclear power and research into geo-engineering.
11.
by thribbler 16y ago
Attractive people, on average, think less and are more sensitive to emotion including conscience. This makes them more likely to be good and less likely to be guilty of crime. Thinking draws resources away from the body and thus indirectly
12.
by thribbler 16y ago
Who are preferable, today's "helicopter parents" or the "because I say so" parents of the previous generation? Or the "Beat you till you cry" parents of the generation before. Or the "Off to the factory, brat" parents, etc.
13.
by thribbler 16y ago
If you study bullies carefully you will notice that they are continually probing potential victims for the right kind of emotional response (prior to any further verbal or physical abuse). If they don't elicit one they move on to new target
14.
by thribbler 16y ago
You're right, the theory is unfalsifiable (for now at least). However, I have argued for it, and I believe if offers the best explanation for the nerd-bully phenomenon. Bullies can't really pick on people who are simply mistaken, they can o
15.
by thribbler 16y ago
Part of my explanation would be that you can only insult a person with their compliance. If they become offended or defensive then they are implicitly conceding that you have a point. So, although nerds are consciously unaware of their deni
16.
by thribbler 16y ago
It is in the nature of denial that one is unaware both of what is denied and of the denial itself. Only when denial is relinquished does one realise that the it was both real and voluntary.
17.
by thribbler 16y ago
They lack social skills because they lack emotional intelligence. To take it further: nerds lack emotional intelligence because they have learnt to ignore the relevant emotions. That is why bullies are able to bait nerds; they both feel t