Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Another point is that there are two problems with correlating IQ against drug use:
- there is substantial dispute as to the validity of the very concept of IQ
- there is a cause/effect ambiguity.Perhaps the same people who use cannabis at a young age also take up life paths that militate against maintaining 'IQ' as they age (manual rather than knowledge work, less stimulating environments, etc). There's also the known cultural bias in IQ testing.
I wonder whether they also monitored cocaine use (pretty small sample in Dunedin). You might find that cocaine users show improved 'IQ' results - this being due not to any effect of the drug, but that only really smart people can earn enough dollars to afford the stuff.
-
Hard News: Changing news, in reply to Bart Janssen,
1+1=3
True if plus is a binary string concatenation operator and inputs/outputs are in decimal.
1+1+1=10
True in base 3
-
Hard News: Leaf and Tips, in reply to Russell Brown,
One would be fairly f..d up on twenty joints a day. I think lung cancer would be the least of your worries.
Also, one could use those pictures to illustrate a book on cultivation techniques (all images courtesy NZ police).
Anyways, the question for me isn't "is weed safe" - it clearly isn't. It's more, should we throw people in jail for an activity that harms only themselves?
-
The Guardian has [not] been any less good since it switched to Berliner format
I was disappointed in it when I went over to the UK though. Was expecting a jam filled doughnut with the news in some sort of fortune cookie styled insert.
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
I'm assuming that NZ First, UF and the Maori Party don't have youth wings. (I thought NZF had one for the under 65s?)
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Russell Brown,
Don't NZ newspapers expect reprint rights on their content?
-
the ability for subs to the FT and WSJ to essentially write it off as a work expense
Also, they've been selling subscription services for at least 20 years, probably longer, over services such as Dialog, Newsedge and Telerate. (The latter was owned by Dow Jones). I worked in that industry in the 90's, and there were large numbers (several hundred thousand) of WSJ subs and a similar, if smaller, set of FT subs out there, at prices of several hundred dollars a month, if I recall correctly.
-
Anything with flash in (USB sticks, SSDs) it is specced for maybe 10 years.
I wouldn't trust magnetic media for much longer than that either (see here for some analysis) although in the case of a lot of failure modes, recovery might be possible with (expensive) clean-room techniques.
Your best bet is to keep your data on a regularly replaced drive at home *and* at a cloud provider. Or at two independent cloud providers.
-
Hard News: Media3: Where harm might fall, in reply to Keir Leslie,
I think most laws are actually matters serious enough that if they come to the attention of the authorities, enforcement action is fairly mandatory (especially when a complaint is made). Laws which are usually left unenforced are in the minority.
Feel free to spend your weekend categorising the statutes of NZ to prove me wrong.
Not to mention the fact that enforcement tends to depend on the enforcers prejudice. Wealthy white people don't get busted for weed much, poor brown people do. See also "driving while black", etc.
Anyway, this proposed framework removes the discretion to refuse prosecution, because there's no prosecutor. If someone has a beef with a tweet, post or blog comment, they can mail the tribunal/mediator with a complaint. The recipient then has to respond or lose by default.
(I'm not sure how the 'mediation' is supposed to work. If the complainant digs their heels in and asserts the material is offensive/obscene/untruthful or whatever, then either the defendant gives up and withdraws, or the matter has to go to the tribunal. As others have pointed out, it's not like complaining about an iffy plumbing job).
-
Hard News: Media3: Where harm might fall, in reply to Morgan Nichol,
Do we really want laws that we hope will only be enforced sometimes?
Word.