A quick word on blocking ads
It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
iced*So I have to write
Your spelling suggests you are in grade school, but that can't be since it is march break. Night school?
either way you are fucked bud
zoutendamat53how people can be smart
JoeF2661^ person seems legit.
The referenced post has been removed.
The referenced post has been removed.
duhamelskiProgrammers are a social experiment and part of its objective is actually to increase intelligence; this is a history of man that goes back to ancient times.
Yes we are smarter than anything out there, even mathematicians in a way, and it has to do with our problem solving domain. This domain itself lends structure and dynamics to accomplishing impossible tasks. The methods we use are great for problem solving and trouble shooting. Further the domain contains a problem set that is severely limited: it only includes that which is systematically describable. This has some pull from Science, which does not address ANY impossible problem: the actual goal being to only handle problems we can actually solve. There is technically a limitted number of things we can do with computers - it is limitted by our creativity.
This isn’t our first run at this issue. Some time ago, we started with tribal leaders. Then we went to religious leaders. Eventually we went to fashion and then agricultural leaders. There is always someone running the show: the creators of the latest and greatest technology; but it’s not always who people think it is. And each time, the people “running the show” are doing something entirely different. How does making clothes or seeds control people more effectively than telling them stories about god or threatening to beat them up? I don’t actually know all of the details, but I’ve worked for a fashion company, and a seed company, and let me assure you, your clothing is far more important to you than your stories about God, regardless of what you may think about it. It might help to say that they put some scratchy bits in there, so you don’t think I’m a total conspiracy nut… . Anyway, last time around, the world made Scientists. They were pretty good, but they had some really serious and terrible problems.
While the Scientific Method is used to justify Science, the rule they actually follow instead is simply to discard any impractical problem from their domain. Ironically this is the very thing that was used to separate Science from Religion in the first place: both were created in the interest of studying and knowing the universe to much greater depths, for the purpose of raising man, but both have been hobbled by a stubborn inability to see that the truth HAS in fact changed! Religion could not see that the earth is not the center of the universe, that the sun is. And then no, Science can’t see that it’s your own heart. Science does not believe in your heart. They’ve gone rather a lot more terrifying than Religion ever was.
And for that hippy zealot who says that we should follow the laws set by God: No, the laws of nature can’t change. If we choose to reject technological advances, we will not have this problem. But that doesn’t make Nature worthy to be a system of exploration for mankind. Man sees all laws as challenges; “How are you going to break THIS one?” So the laws don’t all necessarily apply anymore in all situations. Let’s say a scientist’s device makes a noise that agitates a person’s spinal cord and nervous system by using the resonant audio waves generated from a well made engine in any motorized system. It’s important to note that people who have limited problem domain sets can become very intelligent and only use their highly selected skills to solve other problems. What might a programmer do instead, if the leaf blowers are indeed the best Science could have offered?
duhamelskiProgrammers are a social experiment and part of its objective is actually to increase intelligence; this is a history of man that goes back to ancient times.
Yes we are smarter than anything out there, even mathematicians in a way, and it has to do with our problem solving domain. This domain itself lends structure and dynamics to accomplishing impossible tasks. The methods we use are great for problem solving and trouble shooting. Further the domain contains a problem set that is severely limited: it only includes that which is systematically describable. This has some pull from Science, which does not address ANY impossible problem: the actual goal being to only handle problems we can actually solve. There is technically a limitted number of things we can do with computers - it is limitted by our creativity.
This isn’t our first run at this issue. Some time ago, we started with tribal leaders. Then we went to religious leaders. Eventually we went to fashion and then agricultural leaders. There is always someone running the show: the creators of the latest and greatest technology; but it’s not always who people think it is. And each time, the people “running the show” are doing something entirely different. How does making clothes or seeds control people more effectively than telling them stories about god or threatening to beat them up? I don’t actually know all of the details, but I’ve worked for a fashion company, and a seed company, and let me assure you, your clothing is far more important to you than your stories about God, regardless of what you may think about it. It might help to say that they put some scratchy bits in there, so you don’t think I’m a total conspiracy nut… . Anyway, last time around, the world made Scientists. They were pretty good, but they had some really serious and terrible problems.
While the Scientific Method is used to justify Science, the rule they actually follow instead is simply to discard any impractical problem from their domain. Ironically this is the very thing that was used to separate Science from Religion in the first place: both were created in the interest of studying and knowing the universe to much greater depths, for the purpose of raising man, but both have been hobbled by a stubborn inability to see that the truth HAS in fact changed! Religion could not see that the earth is not the center of the universe, that the sun is. And then no, Science can’t see that it’s your own heart. Science does not believe in your heart. They’ve gone rather a lot more terrifying than Religion ever was.
And for that hippy zealot who says that we should follow the laws set by God: No, the laws of nature can’t change. If we choose to reject technological advances, we will not have this problem. But that doesn’t make Nature worthy to be a system of exploration for mankind. Man sees all laws as challenges; “How are you going to break THIS one?” So the laws don’t all necessarily apply anymore in all situations. Let’s say a scientist’s device makes a noise that agitates a person’s spinal cord and nervous system by using the resonant audio waves generated from a well made engine in any motorized system. It’s important to note that people who have limited problem domain sets can become very intelligent and only use their highly selected skills to solve other problems. What might a programmer do instead, if the leaf blowers are indeed the best Science could have offered?
faatasNow that it is on a public website it is useless, ever heard of turnitin.com?
