FriendlyHacker

Making things easier for normal people to use is an usability/design problem, not a math problem. We already have the technology for it, but not the designs. What would be important to move to that direction is for a new generation of engineers to start caring about design and have the two fields combine into one, instead of having brilliant people like Linus (who totally sucks at design) to be responsible for moving computing forward. Also, the way to go is for code editors to start understanding everyday language, instead of having people like us trying to speak to computers in a foreign convoluted language, where a single misplaced character breaks everything. Why not? Quantum computing will be the biggest revolution in technology ever, and all one must do is solve the interference problem.

Cool, this would be useful for building machine code on a Quantum computer.

I was brought al-Burg who is an animal white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, who would place his hoof at a distance equal to the range of vision. I mounted it and came to the Temple (Bait-ul Maqdis in Jerusalem), then tethered it to the ring used by the prophets. (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 1, p. 101). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isra_and_Mi'raj http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol1/3d.html

It's not claim, it's a curious idea.

It's on Isra and Mi'raj, not a donkey though, it's a winged white donkey with a human head, called the Al-Bura, which makes even less sense.

Muhammad ascended to heaven in a flying donkey, he must have figured out room temperature superconductors.

And won't pay alimony.

Can you explain the physics of flying donkeys? We need to tap into that technology!

Could God be a tactic for males to seem less stupid and improve the odds of sexual selection? https://twitter.com/friendly_hacker/status/409419953939308545

If there are trolls on this board and they receive upvotes for trolling, does that not defeat the whole purpose of the feature? Though I can't complain, websites are not a democracy, they are private property and I can't tell what people should be doing over their own private property. Some people get pissed off and bitch about posts being deleted, accounts being blocked, these people don't realize that Admins can kick them out of their private property, with or without any reason.

Is it a technocratic dictatorship without human concerns? 1984? Is it all about technology development? Learn the answers to those questions an many others:

It's called dual nature, because it's a beach ball that turns into a tsunami when you turn your back to it. And yes, it does not make any sense, nature couldn't care less about human notions of what is sensible.

Yes you will: God did it

Thanks for the link. Yeah, 50% is a probability, and so is 0,000000001234564%, as I said before QM is the most accurate theory ever devised, even though they use double nature, statistical analysis and don't really understand why it works, it still works.

You know why Walmart workers are unskilled and not very good at their jobs? Because they work at a shitty job for meager wage, and hate it. Incidentally they can't afford higher education and can't even afford to commute there even if it they were to have it for free. Knowing you're being screwed over and that you are a slave, also makes you more prone to depression, procrastination, high blood pressure, domestic violence and many other problems. If you think that is bad for people on the USA, ever wonder what actually happens in poor countries? When someone says people don't work hard enough, it makes me want to drag them down to the factory in Thailand that makes their fancy cellphones and hipster clothing, and tell them: Look at that mother fuckers! Just fucking look at those people who work 18 hours a day and don't even have the time to think about studying, and then you tell me how much fucking harder effort you put into your cushy office job! Then you can tell me: Dude, didn't you just say you only have up to high school education and you're doing alright? The only reason I only have up to high school education, is because my parents have a combined total of 5 undergraduate degrees + scientific training in math, physics and engineering. Plus I lived in a mid class family and had access to computers and Internet before most people even knew what that was. So you see, if your parents work at Walmart and don't know much about anything, you tend to be that way too. Stefan might have lived in a poor family (maybe poor by Canadian standards), but has said he lived in an intellectually rich environment there, and is not fair to compare that to someone who has parents who can't read or write.

No, I don't hear thrashing around, loud bumps or adults screaming. I really can't understand why children would have temper tantrums like that though.

Strange thing is, If you setup an experiment to detect waves, it will detect waves. If is setup to find particles, it will find particles. It's both things at the same time, this dual nature of the Universe is fundamentally what quantum physics is about. Maybe you can't have two outcomes at the same time but the outcome can only be predicted if you consider that such thing can happen, and then try calculating the result statistically (wavefunction). Whether or not someone is watching will yield a different outcome, the more you watch the momentum, higher will be the standard deviation for speed (uncertainty principle). Trying to watch what a particle does will alter the particle, unless you can somehow watch it without causing the interference problem, how to not cause interference is the trillion dollar question and the key to quantum computing. There's that saying in physics that anything that is not forbidden is mandatory. That is exactly like Moore's law for computer engineers though, it has no real predictability, it's an educated guess that seems to match reality, but still a guess. Same thing goes for Occam's razor and finding mathematical beauty in nature, it isn't necessarily that way and the fact that it seems to be is more of a curiosity. But hey, don't listen to me about these things. My formal education only goes up to high school level.

I live in a large apartment complex, there are many small children living around here, and at least once a day I hear children cry, often not the same child. This really makes me distressed, because these children cry like someone is bulging their eye balls out, and I mostly can't understand what is going on, the times I did understand what was going on, I learned that they can cry like that while taking medication or for simply being told to leave the playground. So even though they cry like they are being abused, so far I have no real evidence of it and don't really know how to deal with it. Any advice?

That is the most terrifying assumption to my previous post to the one you've replied, something I don't even like to think about too much for fearing of going insane. The dual wave/particle nature of the Universe, is how you would expect it to be if it was designed by a computer engineer. It behaves like it was not even there when not being observed, and behaves like a particle while being directly observed, that is, it behaves like single pixels. If you ever played an open world video game, you know that the Universe is not really there, unless you happen to come across that particular area of it, and then characters, cars, buildings, etc pop into existence. The thing is, if we can even imagine an advanced enough open world simulation technology, given enough time, wouldn't something as complex as our own reality be realistically simulated? And if such thing is even possible, how do we know if has not already happened? How do we know if we are not the ones who built it and this is some kind of disturbing entertainment that our future selves enjoy? Only reason I sleep at night, is realizing I will probably never be able to tell the difference if this was true, so it does not fucking matter at all.

If you start off your argument saying the opposing view is absurd, you don't have an argument, what you have is a predefined worldview and the willingness to trash anything that disagrees with it, you're unwilling to change because your mind is too clouded with confirmation bias for it to happen. James Randi hates to be called a debunker, because it implies he already knows the answer before examining the evidence. You haven't examined the evidence, your video shows how little you know about RBE and speaks volumes about your real intentions. What you want is not someone to debate to, what you want is manipulate people into sounding stupid and irrational. Maybe you don't want a debate, maybe you just want to sound important among your peers and massage your ego.

If you redefine life as anything other than what the actual medical term means, you can say there is afterlife. If you redefine God as a lump of coal, then yes God is very real. Redefining words only cause confusion though and scientists should probably stop trying. Einstein talking about God has nothing to do with the God of the desert, he redefined the term by his very own perspective and people who do not understand this perspective are confused by it to this day. A Journalist needs to get views on her articles though, else she will be fired, so she has more incentive for twisting someone's words till they sound more interesting and appealing. There are a lot of bullshit articles out there, written by reputable journalists, that are just filling space with things people want to read while containing very little meaning.

Dildos are proof of the objectification of men.

We have this very interesting documentary available here: The Truth About Vitaminshttp://www.videoneat.com/documentaries/1157/the-truth-about-vitamins-documentary-watch-online/

There's this common misconception that scientists only believe in what can be seen, what can be seen is not important at all, if it only exists in someone's memory it can't be independently checked and therefore is worthless. The important thing is not what can be seen, but what can be accurately measured, repeatedly. If you saw a lump of meat, you can only guess its weight by looking at it, while a scientist would go about measuring it with a precision scale.

If you don't know something, be honest about it and stop calling it God. Read about the God of the Gaps.