throwmeunder

I have a hackintosh with i3 2310M[1], 8GB RAM and I think the 12 inch macbook, 1.2gh has 5Y71[2] ticking inside it. Judging by the benchmarks they are pretty similar with the 5Y71 beating the i3 on single threaded stuff with the higher clock speed but not always.

My machine handles a Windows8.1 in VirtualBox easily. I use it for Visual Studio 2013 daily and it's fine although it's not perfect. It's slow at times but not enough to make me dualboot.

I hope that someone chimes in with Win VM on the real MacBook because I'm interested in it but I think it'll be just fine.

[1] http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i3-2310M-Notebook-Pr... [2] http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-M-5Y71-SoC.129324.0....

And in turn learn social cues, how to approach people, rejection.

Mistakes will hurt a bit more than at 16 yo but at the same time the social circle is more mature as well and can express themselves better if necessary.

Also I agree that it's better to not have that as a end goal but if the person feels it as a burden, sex is a great tool for validation and ego boost. And it certainly is a quick way to bond with someone. Also in the pursuit of it people can really focus on improving themselves.

Again it might be unhealthy to try really hard and in turn alienate people but it can also be motivating and can help sometimes. Especially if the person is mature enough and recognises normal limits.

edit:Sorry. I got lost in the comment chain and missed the context of your post, sorry if that edit comes after your post.

The problem here is the equivalence between weight lifting and crossfit. Within weightlifting and powerlifting circles crossfit is perceived as an abomination and something that should be killed. The main issue here is the culture surrounding the crossfit movement, which is what you've already observed. Note that I've said nothing about crossfit as an idea in and itself.

And to the point about weightlifting being a form of meditation - it absolutely is.

Just as a thought exercise - think of a some restriction you have had. Be it going to bed early, getting up early, drinking less, eating less, doing something, etc. That's the temptation with breaking form - it's usually super easy to break your form and that's the thing you have to mindfully control. Repeating cues and having that mind-body connection. That really trains your focus.

Then you have the burden of lifting the weight when you can no longer see or think. Every set, every rep you have to do something incredibly pointless - it has no immediate effects, no one is forcing you and the only reason is because you want to. But that thing is incredibly hard and the alternative is just not doing it. I'm sure you've been faced with a tough decision or choice that you must make and you wanted to just not make it. At a point lifting is choosing to face that decision over and over and over again - it's not just a physical exercise it becomes a huge mental exercise as well.

Everyone has that story when you didn't see what weight you put on the bar and you just made a 10% PR when you've been struggling with the previous weight for months.

Usually when being at your maximum when performing an exercise(squat, deadlift, sprinting, etc.) all extraneous thoughts disappear, you focus is on the movement, your thoughts become a tad slower, and your will is tested all the time. There's a very similar sensation when meditating and I've felt that also when focusing on a problem or riding a bike. Also the shouting and getting angry is a mix of getting your body ready and focusing at the task at hand - a bit similar to the chants or music during meditation(not really a fan of that tbh but some people swear by it - ambiguous on purpose). Sometimes when warming up or just during submaximal sets, thoughts just come and go and you are definitely there doing the work and thinking them and yet you're on the sidelines calm, relaxed and observing yourself and your mind.

It's a bit weird and I maybe gave a crappy description but that's my experience with lifting and meditation.

That's true but most people are used to a smaller DR(up to a point of course but that point is way out) and still prefer the lower DR even after normalization.

>If the lower dynamic range tracks sound louder even after normalization then the normalization algorithm is flawed.

That's not quite true. Listen to this: https://soundcloud.com/amp-33/sets/uncompressed-vs-compresse...

Those two things have a pretty similar loudness(A-weighted RMS) and yet the compressed one sounds louder than the measured difference - ~3dB A-weighted which is not obvious to perceive untrained.

As a test - download them both, amplify the Uncompressed one at -2.7dB and listen to them again. They have the same A-weighted RMS yet the Uncompressed one sounds louder.

A-weighting - http://www.diracdelta.co.uk/science/source/a/w/aweighting/so... RMS - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_mean_square Measurements done with Audacity, wave stats: http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?p=248505#p248505

edit:to add the quote

To add on to that the complexity of developing such weapons grows considerably when you take into account the uniqueness of each target - various resistances, adrenaline, different body composition, hit area and so on. If you fail to incapacitate the target they might retaliate lethally.

Which is actually possible with lethal weapons too - people don't always die from a shot or two and not always instantly. So to ensure the threat is defused the weapons must be very effective and the best way to ensure that is by making them as lethal as possible.

I agree with you. But she's saying things which are, in my opinion, untrue.

It's easy to say "good job, you're stronger than that" and it is helpful. For everyone else that is not in a better mental state there should be an objective discussion from a wider viewpoint.

Anyway, the submission has been flagkilled so I guess HN is not the place for such a discussion.

No. It's the most common and primitive reaction to a preventable problem. Bike stolen? Don't leave it in a bad spot. Mugged? Don't walk through back alleys. Server hacked? Don't listen on all ports. Email? Bad password + reuse.

If you've never been on the receiving end of a similar comment you don't know how irritating and unhelpful it is. It's not malice or hatred .. it's a lack of a different perspective and information.

First having your naked pictures out in the internet against your consent is an awful thing that shouldn't happen to anyone. Having your information out in the public eye and emails like the ones she received is terrifying and the more severe problem here.

That being sad I disagree with the whole subtext of the story: that these people get off on the idea of a non consenting victim.

quotes from http://www.hystericalfeminisms.com/consent/: "It’s one thing to be sexualised by people who are attracted to you, but it’s quite another thing when the lack of a ‘you’, when dehumanization, is the main factor."

"Take ‘creepshots’, a global phenomenon which entails photographing women without their knowledge or consent, in order to share them in a sexual context online. On similar sites, people link to Facebook pages asking if anyone can hack or find more pictures of the girl. Here, again, women are used as objects whose lack of consent, of participation, provides the reason and allure of their sexualisation."

"This dynamic is a commonplace online and is a concrete manifestation of a larger discourse around the female body, the notion that it is erotic to sexualise someone who is unaware. We all know the tropes: the sexy teacher/student/nurse/waiter/bartender/doctor. All jobs, if staffed by women, can be sexualised. What is sexy is not the job, not even the woman, but the fact that while the woman is just doing her job you are secretly sexualising her."

Now I am sure there are people that find that arousing but I've just completed high school-university stage and my insight in my peers is a bit different. The people that say stuff like that do it mainly because they find the girl desirable, but have a problem communicating that in a normal way. In other words they are socially inexperienced and that's their way of talking to someone of sexual interest. Overanalyzing this might say that they use insults and threats as a shield to rejection. Pictures of naked people are wanted because they are pictures of naked people. Context matters and in some edge cases may be turned in a fetish but the main allure of almost all "creepshots" is sexual desirability and not the lack of consent.

Similarly I've talked to people that raped and people that were nearly stopped and the reason was always sexual tension(small sample, date rapes, rape = sex/fingering w/o consent). Control? Maybe but not the main reason at all.

>So it's very possible we could build an AGI, but won't know how to make it any smarter than us.

Make it as smart as the smartest of us and then it'll figure out how to become smarter on its own. Then ask it to explain to us how we work.

Tongue in cheek but once almost-as-intelligent-as-a-human level is reached the next step is not that far fetched - quantity, multiple times faster than humans learning and we have progression on a different scale. Or we can always try mutating the thing to see what comes out - crude but worked at least once.

Sorry but forming hypothesis based on observations, which is what assumptions means to me, is induction. They are fallible so they need to be proven in order to be accepted. Usually that's done by proof of contradiction.

But you don't need to prove them to use them. Many people go around believing unproven theories. In the sciences the preference is for verified theories(and theorems in math) and we prove them by deduction.

But it seems that you know that. I don't understand why you don't like induction in a general algorithm. We don't have to restrict ourselves to a single type of reasoning. Induction, deduction, abduction are all valid and used by humans for generating new knowledge.

I might be misunderstanding something in which case please correct me.