TheVat

Nope. 😀 Done.

Yes, the article points to critcisms of innate grammar and what Chomsky called universals. The section on language localization presents strong critiques of innateness. First, as Elman et al. 1996 argue, neural localization of function can occur as a result of virtually any developmental trajectory: the localization of some function bears not at all on its innateness....

I'm not sure if Chomsky has it quite right, but his theory of innate language is a good starting point to the whole question of language acquisition. Here's a little intro: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/innateness-language/ With advances in syntax and semantics came the realization that knowing a language was not merely a matter of associating words with concepts. It also crucially involves knowledge of how to put words together, for it's typically sentences that we use to express our thoughts, not words in isolation. If that's the case, though, language mastery can be no simple matter. Modern linguistic theories have shown that human languages are vastly complex objects. The syntactic rules governing sentence formation and the semantic rules governing the assignment of meanings to sentences and phrases are immensely complicated, yet language users apparently apply them hundreds or thousands of times a day, quite effortlessly and unconsciously. But if knowing a language is a matter of knowing all these obscure rules, then acquiring a language emerges as the monumental task of learning them all. Thus arose the question that has driven much of modern linguistic theory: How could mere children learn the myriad intricate rules that govern linguistic expression and comprehension in their language — and learn them solely from exposure to the language spoken around them? Clearly, there is something very special about the brains of human beings that enables them to master a natural language — a feat usually more or less completed by age 8 or so. §2.1 of this article introduces the idea, most closely associated with the work of the MIT linguist Noam Chomsky, that what is special about human brains is that they contain a specialized ‘language organ,’ an innate mental ‘module’ or ‘faculty,’ that is dedicated to the task of mastering a language...

Amusing article on the Sideways effect, which pinpoints that it was the character's personal flaws and "antagonistic contrarian tendencies" that were really behind his antipathy towards Merlot. And yes, it's a very easy to drink libation. At least until the migraine begins...

Americans don't IMHO have consistent traits such that you can always distinguish them. In the northern Plains where I grew up and lived a large percent of my life, people who travel often report being asked if they're Canadian. When I was in the UK, people invariably asked if I was Canadian, and I was okay with that. There is a segment of American tourists that can be, TBH, rather whiny and entitled. And even if such tourists are only 40% of American tourists, they are the ones that are noticed and stick in people's minds. Unfortunate.

In a few billion years, the sun will be renamed "Peter Dinklage."

Sometimes the extreme paranoia ("law enforcement trap") of the Trumpists seems to work in a way that's beneficial to the country. Ideally, they will all stay holed up in their basements, cowering from the impending Socialist Globalist Drag Queen Apocalypse - this will reduce their chances of reproducing, too. You can't transmit your genes through Truth Social or Zoom orgies. Also worth noting that in the US, we don't really handle white collar criminals the same way as the rest - generally, they go down to the courthouse or precinct station with some lawyers, sign some papers, and then go home. No cuffs, no orange jumpsuits, no perp-walks. It's a pity, really.

Red wine gives me a headache, too, though I usually need a couple glasses. The theory I've heard is that it's rapid vasodilation from histamine, a compound found in grape skins. Red wine contains more histamine than white wine because it's made from the whole grape (including the skin), not just the juice. And it's not uncommon to have a shortage of the enzyme that breaks down histamine in the gut. Haha!

Can't help but think of Miles, in "Sideways" as I read this thread. Like Miles, I'm a pinot noir fan. Miles Raymond : ... it's a hard grape to grow, as you know. Right? It's uh, it's thin-skinned, temperamental, ripens early. It's, you know, it's not a survivor like Cabernet, which can just grow anywhere and uh, thrive even when it's neglected. No, Pinot needs constant care and attention. You know? And in fact it can only grow in these really specific, little, tucked away corners of the world. And, and only the most patient and nurturing of growers can do it, really. Only somebody who really takes the time to understand Pinot's potential can then coax it into its fullest expression. Then, I mean, oh its flavors, they're just the most haunting and brilliant and thrilling and subtle and... ancient on the planet

The US healthcare system will persist in these problems until we move away from healthcare as a profit-centered enterprise, all parents are guaranteed extended maternity leave, and public health is funded to where any young woman has easy access to prenatal care, nutritional counseling, and (to be painfully obvious) reproductive choice such that she is in full control of when she starts a family or doesn't. Also need to end "food deserts" and substandard housing and....really, many aspects of low-income neighborhoods seems to contribute to the health differential. Only recently does it seem, for example, that public officials have started to see mapping and research that connects diesel soot levels and neighborhood health.

And rather similar to the drag-panic going on in the US. Take something that's not a threat, concoct a strawman bogeyman that sounds like one, then just repeat and virally replicate ad infinitum. Soundbites against "woke" that are of the form "they will teach your children to hate themselves and their own white heritage," are the same dishonest formulation as the drag-panic soundbites like "they will expose your children to deviant adult sexuality." What a bunch of snowflakes.

Yep. I should have mentioned that counting discrete objects would be a different situation. Just catching up with thread now. I also thank you.

I think it doesn't. I think any measurement will fall short of that precision. And at the Planck level, it may not be possible even in principle? You may get 0.3333333329 with some error margin. Rational numbers may only lie in some Platonic realm. (similar idea is that all surfaces in the real world are not precise 2D, but some fractal expression, like around 2.11112 D) Same thing for irrational numbers. And plus 1, cool thread.

Measurements cannot even provide many rational numbers. No one can measure 1/3. Maybe you will get 0.33332. With some margin of error. That’s not 1/3 and it doesn't seem you can improve the accuracy of the experiment to make it so. 1/3 will always lie between error margins and beyond our observation. Is there any physical distinction that matters between a rational number and an irrational number if the two are closer to each other than the experimental error?

DeSantis is like a form of ChatGPT producing responses to populist inputs. If insentient robots ruled, their proclamations on "intellectual freedom" would often sound Orwellian the way DeS does. The thing is, when he proposes policies that are blatantly unconstitutional, and sounds most like a robot with no thoughts of its own, he is at his most repellent to most of the electorate. You can't fool enough people forever with this crap. The policies will crumble in the Courts, he will look weak and foolish, and he will fade from the scene. Crikey I'm optimistic this morning. It also helps that DeS has many in the GOP abandoning him after his recent Trump-bot-like dismissal of Russia's attack on Ukraine. David Frum, a conservative columnist, summed it up as "Message: Tough on drag queens. Weak on national security.” I think this helps to further mark him as someone following simple culture war algorithms but who is otherwise clueless to what's happening in the world. Russia trying to take territory by force? Red tides killing Florida shores? Ex felons cheated out of voting? Ecological disaster in the swamps? massive affordable housing crisis in Florida cities? Pfft! Wokeness is the REAL problem!

YW. Regarding the DC question DC doesn't have much. It's under sole jurisdiction of Congress and lacked a local government until 1973. And all laws from that local council have to be reviewed and approved by Congress, so it's really a bad situation for the residents of DC, who are US citizens but have no Congressional representatives or local autonomy. If there weren't nasty partisan roadblocks, DC would have been a state years ago. A friend of mine was a journalist in DC, so I've gotten earfuls on this.

Or when there is a controversy between two or more states. We're going to see more of that type, with women leaving one state pregnant and returning home not pregnant, because the state they visited allowed abortion. Or, say, Illinois permits cleaning the hamster cage in Lake Michigan but Wisconsin does not. When wood shavings and poo float up to Milwaukee, the Wisconsinites can't bring an action in Illinois state court. And if there's no relevant federal law to settle it, then the federal district court decision itself becomes binding and a legal precedent. I.e. federal courts can arbitrate, and make it stick. (which makes clear why we need a federal law on reproductive rights)

Maybe approach is our natural epistemic condition. Lagrange took a nice step in getting rid of constraint forces (his rigid pendulum rod, e.g.) as @Genady mentioned, and his step was towards describing a system's energies, a function which summarizes the dynamics of the entire system. For my limited understanding of physics, it seems like "force" can be a move away from sound ontology. (it is fine for moving furniture) And energy and Riemannian curvature seems, oddly, less abstract and more towards ontological terra firma.

https://blog.batchgeo.com/surveillance-cameras-in-your-city/ Least CCTVs by Population Nairobi, Kenya replaces Reykjavik as the number one city with the least surveillance when population is taken into account. In fact, Reykjavik now no longer even appears on the top ten list. City Country # of CCTV Cameras # of People # of CCTV Cameras per 1,000 People Nairobi Kenya 42 4,556,381 0.01 Melbourne Australia 93 4,870,388 0.02 Riyadh Saudi Arabia 150 7,070,665 0.02 Manila Philippines 300 13,698,889 0.02 Cairo Egypt 500 20,484,965 0.02 Stockholm Sweden 70 1,608,037 0.04 Dhaka Bangladesh 1,000 20,283,552 0.05 Surat India 614 6,873,756 0.09 Brasilia Brazil 453 4,558,991 0.10 Bangalore India 1,301 11,882,666 0.11

Not exactly a Pleasant Valley Sunday!

That's a United States District Court. Federal case, as Swanson noted. State and federal courts are entirely separate systems, so much so that for example double jeopardy laws don't apply - a person can be tried for murder in state court, be found not guilty, but then be tried for murder as a federal crime (where state lines were crossed, or federal lands or entities were involved). This judge was appointed by Trump, is sympathetic to conservative legal causes (something no judge should openly be, ever), and so his Amarillo courtroom is a travesty waiting to happen.

"Significant amount" sounds like a really difficult question. Will post if I find such an estimate. I guess a lot hinges on planetary condensation, crustal plate movements, cometary water contributions later, and other factors.

8/8 but had to take a WAG on St Pete. LCM took me some time, my mental math is rusty. I know there's a quicker way, but couldn't recall. Something with factor trees and multiplying the primes. Pencil and paper would have been needed.

Debatable. Early supernovae were massive and blew out a rich broth of heavier elements. https://beta.nsf.gov/news/potential-first-traces-universes-earliest-stars#:~:text=The very first stars likely,distinctive blend of heavy elements.

The Drake equation has many conjectures as to each of its factors. Not all of them yield millions of intelligent civilizations. While I could agree that if there are millions, some will be likely higher on the Kardashev scale than us, we just don't know at this point how often intelligent civilizations happen or how long they last on average. Our data point is one such civilization, us, still struggling not to annihilate ourselves.