Bio not provided
1 year, 7 months ago on Mars One Project: "Humans Will Live On Mars In 2023"
@mtwomer Agreed!! If only we could pool 10$ billion together, this could become a reality. Hell, in fiscal year 2010, the US military defense budget was 683$ billion. The space elevator would cost 1.5% of that military budget!
1 year, 9 months ago on What Ever Happened To The Space Elevator?
@HeavygearDiver I'm intrigued; tell me more about hyperbaric and diving physics. email@example.com Live long and prosper! \--/
@HeavygearDiver That certainly did not prevent humanity from inventing the nuclear bomb! :-) But I see your point...
@MikeHaseler No, I don't think manmade global warming is about to cause armageddon. What a ludicous idea! The accusation demonstrates what an emotional topic Global Warming is for many people. Like all scientific studies, the study of global warming should be as unemotional, objective and evidence-based as possible, yet sadly many people spew their armageddon garbage, their preconceptions, and their often erroneous, unsupported claims all over it.
Your ability to draw this doomsayer conclusion about me from the article puzzles me, because nowhere does it even touch on my ideas about this very complicated and controversial subject. Indeed, I am not a climate scientist, and would never have the nerve to draw any conclusions without seeing and understanding the evidence myself. If more people could admit this lack of authority on the subject, we would probably have less doomsdayers and inaccurate public interpretation.
But I digress.
This article is not about global warming at all. My GW comment was just an analogy and lead-in to show that the number of dwindling Wikipedia editors, like the Earth climate statistics, are evident, though the cause is not undoubtably clear. Hence its controversial nature, and why discussion on the causes of why Wikipedia is running out of editors is welcome.
Now on to the actual topic at hand: Wikipedia. Like any joint project, it is subject to the viewpoints, biases, and personal flaws of all who edit it. From what you write Mr. Haseler, it sounds like certain groups have monopolized control of its content. Can you think of any solutions for this problem? I'd be curious to hear them.
1 year, 11 months ago on Reddit: Why Is Wikipedia Running Out Of Editors?
@JT Pedersen JT, that's unfortunate to hear! And joining the 'in' crowd presents a whole new challenge, one that as writers focused on the content we should not have to face. Wikipedia was all about leveling the field after all, right?
Haha, it is, unless you want to be on welfare. So you're basically advocating that people should start families without any financial backup? It doesn't take a biologist to realize how irresponsible that is.
2 years ago on Is Choremonster Helping Us Raise Little Monsters? A Skeptic's View
@wiseacre ..."but often the motivation to get our kids to do that is negative. ("Please put the dishes away or you won't...). We don't wish to reinforce a negative motivation." Society does not shy away from negative motivations. (If you fail to pay your house mortgage, the bank will say, "Please pay your bills or you won't...") If you don't fulfill some baseline responsibility such as paying an electric bill, the electric company will send your bill to a collection agency and might even repossess your property.
"But the fact is, that kids do not do chores, period." Everyone I knew growing up did chores. I'm sure most people in the United States have had similar experiences. Can you cite your sources?
"I don't know of any adults that can survive and provide for their family by not getting anything but a pat on the back as income."
The prerequisite to starting a family is many years of hard work and entry-level positions until obtaining a raise and the financial stability to be on your own. This requires self-discipline and delayed gratification, while the system behind Choremonster seems to be doing just the opposite, since the reward is immediate.
And systems of immediate rewards have been known to cause bad life habits. A Columbia university study (http://duende.uoregon.edu./~hsu/blogfiles/Shoda,Mischel,&Peake%281990%29.pdf) showed a strong correlation between mastering delayed gratification and important life skills such as ability to plan, thinking ahead, and using/responding to reason.
On a similar note, a Stanford study (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/18/090518fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all) showed that children who have the drive to delay eating candy are more likely to apply that drive in important life skills. A participant of the study said years later, "If you give me a challenge or a task, then I'm going to find a way to do it, even if that means not eating my favorite food."
"You can even use the system without getting any reward." Do you have any statistics showing what percentage of parents are doing this?
And while teaching children the value of community service and altruism is important, you can't effectively help others until your own life is in order.