There's no P in hamster...
-
@levicki That's not what "deterrence" is. Secondly, you're the prime example why we can't "fix" some things.
Also, you've got the costs really upside-down. Capital punishment in the US is usually considerably more expensive than a life sentence.
-
@levicki Holy mother of non-sequitur.
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
It's funny how you're using the word "naive" while holding very naive views on how human minds work.
To me it's funny that so many people claim they understand how human minds work yet they apparently can't fix anything in human behavior.
Ever heard of theoretical physicists? Do you find them funny too?
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Capital punishment in the US is usually considerably more expensive than a life sentence.
Which has 0% to do with capital punishment itself and 100% to do with stupid laws mandating the most expensive capital punishment procedure imaginable. Bears are much bigger and more durable than humans. Killing a human cannot have a bigger inherent cost than killing a bear.
Personally, I'm against capital punishment - but for entirely different reason: judges get it wrong sometimes.
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
How much is one hour of work for of two armed guards, one executioner, one janitor to mop up the blood, and one coroner to sign the death certificate vs years of food and prison amenities?
You're forgetting about the legal consts which quite often considerably exceed the costs of incarceration.
https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Is_the_death_penalty_more_expensive_than_life_in_prison
Here. Everything is cited, you may examine the results for yourself.
The very second definition of the word "deter" is "prevent the occurrence of" so maybe not read everything too literally?
Unless you want to execute everyone for every single slight annoyance, this is an idiotic train of thought. Not to mention that there are quite a number of murder cases who reasonably will not see the offender re-offending, punishment or not.
-
@TimeBandit said in There's no P in hamster...:
@PJH The word hampster (with a p) actually exist
FileUnder: Blame Canada
It's a proper name, doesn't count.
-
@Gąska said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Capital punishment in the US is usually considerably more expensive than a life sentence.
Which has 0% to do with capital punishment itself and 100% to do with stupid laws mandating the most expensive capital punishment procedure imaginable. Bears are much bigger and more durable than humans. Killing a human cannot have a bigger inherent cost than killing a bear.
Personally, I'm against capital punishment - but for entirely different reason: judges get it wrong sometimes.
That "judges get it wrong sometimes" is the entire raison d'être for why the legal process is so hideously expensive? And, weirdly enough, even with all the safeguards they still get it wrong.
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
Phis is nop phe end resulp of helicopper parenping.
This is the result of Skinner's "positive reinforcement" applied to humans and a general doctrine that "Everone's opinion is equally important" which turned into a belief that "my ignorance is as good as your knowledge" as Asimov so succintly put it.
"Only reward, no punishment" can be applied to benevolent beings such as dogs, but not to fully sentient cheaters a.k.a. homo sapiens.
Agree with the gist of what you said, but dogs (and other animals) are fully sentient.
-
@MrL said in There's no P in hamster...:
I mean, I don't get what's the appeal of Twitter. You follow someone and you get notifications on everything he writes? So how many people would you really like to follow? Two? Three?! It's like participating in a group chat all the time. Who would want that? And why?
The problem with group chats (e.g. IRC channels) is that you have a fairly small pool of participants, so you can't plonk (killfile) too many, or you have nothing to read. With Twitter, you basically have the whole world to select from. So you don't have to follow anyone whose tweets you don't think are worth reading.
-
@pie_flavor said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
Or are you just outright dismissing everything I wrote in that post, even the part of Isaac Asimov's quote just because you don't like me?
That's the one. @Rhywden is fun to talk to.
Experience Not Found.
-
@jinpa said in There's no P in hamster...:
So you don't have to follow anyone whose tweets you don't think are worth reading.
IOW, I don't have to follow anyone
-
-
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
My dog knows very well that I don't want her to eat shit.
You might want to supplement her diet with some vitamins. Also, taking dog out for a walk when it is sated instead of hungry helps.
I know, and I've tried various things, with little success (it was worse when she was younger, though). Ultimately the main factor is that she's a Lab and is therefore always, always hungry. This is not a figure of speech, it's been shown that Labs are missing some genes about satiety and they are literally always hungry (they share this trait with a couple of other breeds such as retrievers, and ours is a cross between a lab... and a retriever!). That was (indirectly) selected for over the years as this makes them very eager to learn (any edible treat will get you their full attention). It's also what makes labs so prone to becoming obese, and we're literally weighting the food we give her to keep her in shape.
It's kind of sad when you think about it but... that's how it is!
That's pretty interesting. Do you know if Keeshonds/Dutch barge dogs have that as well? We used to have one and unlike our other dog, who will eat when he's hungry from a regularly topped up bowl, the Kees would just eat whatever you gave him and then start sniffing around for more
-
@jinpa said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
Phis is nop phe end resulp of helicopper parenping.
This is the result of Skinner's "positive reinforcement" applied to humans and a general doctrine that "Everone's opinion is equally important" which turned into a belief that "my ignorance is as good as your knowledge" as Asimov so succintly put it.
"Only reward, no punishment" can be applied to benevolent beings such as dogs, but not to fully sentient cheaters a.k.a. homo sapiens.
Agree with the gist of what you said, but dogs (and other animals) are fully sentient.
They're sentient but are they sapient?
-
@Jaloopa Sorry, no, I don't have anymore information. I heard it first on various places, and it's confirmed by e.g. the "Obesity" section of the Wikipedia page on Labradors:
It has been shown that out of all dog breeds, it is the Labrador Retriever that is most likely to be obese.[71] In a 2016 published study it was shown that out of 310 Labradors, most were missing all or parts of the POMC gene. This gene plays a part in appetite regulation as well as indication of the amount of one's stored fat. The study concluded that the absence of that gene had a significant impact on Labrador weight and appetite.[68][71] The POMC gene mutation is present in only one other breed – the Flat-Coated Retriever.[68]
I can't tell you more, but I guess you could look up that POMC gene? (there is a link in wiki)
-
@jinpa said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
Phis is nop phe end resulp of helicopper parenping.
This is the result of Skinner's "positive reinforcement" applied to humans and a general doctrine that "Everone's opinion is equally important" which turned into a belief that "my ignorance is as good as your knowledge" as Asimov so succintly put it.
"Only reward, no punishment" can be applied to benevolent beings such as dogs, but not to fully sentient cheaters a.k.a. homo sapiens.
Agree with the gist of what you said, but dogs (and other animals) are fully sentient.
Indeed. Now SAPIENT, that's another story.
Edit:
by Jaloopa 
-
@e4tmyl33t for both species mentioned.
-
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
I think one way was to overcrowd them or something
There was a study done with mice I remember reading about. When overcrowded they would fight but that is creating artificial pressure which in nature cannot be achieved because their population is kept in check by predators.
I also don't think that human population has reached the levels of overcrowdedness needed for so much pointless violence that happens today.
It got waaaaaay darker than just fighting:
The Secret Of NIMH Was Inspired By A Horrific Experiment
NIMH was a real place and their rat experiments were way darker than the book, movie or your nightmares depicted!
The Cracked precis isn't too bad, but it's well worth looking into his actual research too:
Death Squared: The Explosive Growth and Demise of a Mouse Population.
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
My point is that humans should never be that desparate. People in most civilized countries could live on wellfare if they are not capable of working and sustaining themselves yet they rather join gangs and engage in theft, extortion, kidnapping, sex slave trade, organ harvesting, killing, all to make a buck so they have advantage over... who? what? To eliminate what potential threat?
Or you are all saying that animals also have concepts of greed, envy, and spite?I'm sure some animals do. One specie does, so there's not much reason to assume all others don't.
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
Also, taking dog out for a walk when it is sated instead of hungry helps.
As the owner of corgis — well, one corgi now
— "sated" is a condition that does not occur and must never be allowed to occur. If it were to occur, it would only be when they've eaten so much they literally cannot move, and must be taken to the vet to have their stomachs pumped. I remember being amused by a dog care book that said not to feed a dog more than it can eat in 20 minutes, and remove any food remaining after that time; with a corgi, an entire 20 lb. bag of food would disappear in 20 minutes, and it would still be hungry.
-
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
we're literally weighting the food we give her to keep her in shape.
We don't weigh it, but we use a scoop of definite size and adjust the amount based on the dog's weight.
-
@HardwareGeek said in There's no P in hamster...:
an entire 20 lb. bag of food would disappear in 20 minutes, and it would still be hungry.
We buy our dog food by 30 kg bags (or maybe it's "only" 25 kg?) and for convenience, we buy several of them at once and store them in the cellar. I've always wondered what would happen if our dog decided to rip open the bags. A trip to the vet, for sure, but how much of the bag (or how many bags?) would she be able to eat before stopping? Surely she wouldn't eat more than her own body weight? No?
Edit: my not including "corgi" in the quote gives it a weird meaning... the bag disappears and is still hungry????
-
@DogsB said in There's no P in hamster...:
Spaghetti Eating Competition: Golden Retriever vs German Shepherd
A corgi would have finished its bowl and then eaten the German Shepherd's, too (or at least have tried, if the GS didn't defend it violently enough).
-
@jinpa said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
I never broke the law
There are lies, and there are damn lies.
-
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
@HardwareGeek said in There's no P in hamster...:
an entire 20 lb. bag of food would disappear in 20 minutes, and it would still be hungry.
We buy our dog food by 30 kg bags (or maybe it's "only" 25 kg?) and for convenience, we buy several of them at once and store them in the cellar. I've always wondered what would happen if our dog decided to rip open the bags. A trip to the vet, for sure, but how much of the bag (or how many bags?) would she be able to eat before stopping? Surely she wouldn't eat more than her own body weight? No?
Edit: my not including "corgi" in the quote gives it a weird meaning... the bag disappears and is still hungry????
My family had a cat that always cried for food when she came in the door, so my father decided to feed her until she stopped crying for food. She ate, puked, ate and puked and kept eating before he gave up on teaching the cat a lesson.
We never had a dog of that persuasion, but I'd assume they'd do the same thing. Hell, humans in this fucked up nation used to do so during the dark ages. Well, the blue bloods used to. Everyone else was starving instead.
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Capital punishment in the US is usually considerably more expensive than a life sentence.
Which has much to do with the death penalty resulting in long term incarceration before the sentence is carried out. Someone sentenced to life in prison may appeal the verdict, or not, depending on the nature of the case and whether he/she has enough money to pay a lawyer to handle it. Capital cases, the appeal is automatic in many jurisdictions, and there is no shortage of anti-capital punishment legal foundations who will fund further, grasping-at-straws appeals. The process can stretch for decades while the convict is locked in the most expensive maximum-security facility.
-
@Carnage Anorexics and other eating disorders make you do that. Which makes me wonder if ways to cure humans of those disorders could be applied to cats & dogs. Probably not, seeing as AFAIK the treatment is in a very large psychiatric, which is hard to apply there ("lie down and tell me everything that's bothering you...").
Side story: one of my aunts worked in psychiatry and loves cats. At one point was talking of setting up a business of psychiatry for cats. When asked if she really thought this could work, she said that of course not, cats wouldn't give a fuck about it. But she would take the cats in her office, play with them or pets them for an hour, and come back out to present the bill to the owner. Might have worked, there are suckers everywhere...
(also, I think that I avoided QooC by using "cats" rather than "pussy", but I'm sure someone will prove me wrong)
-
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
how much of the bag (or how many bags?) would she be able to eat before stopping? Surely she wouldn't eat more than her own body weight?
Corgis are said to have the instinctive ability to stop eating one bite short of exploding like Mr. Creosote:
https://youtu.be/lhbHTjMLN5c?t=94
-
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Unless you want to execute everyone for every single slight annoyance, this is an idiotic train of thought.
Of course i don't. I believe that death penalty should be reserved for most egregious crimes and repeat offenders such as serial rapists, killers, people who were involved in mass murders, and stuff like that.
Then I don't see why you have to bring it up. It's not very useful to take an extreme outcome and apply it to a general rule.
Me: "Jogging is a commonly useful from of exercise."
You: "But some people with a heart defect will fall down dead from it!"
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Your original argument was that positive reinforcement was a problem.
I read it as saying that was the P-girl's problem. More specifically, that she got lots of positive reinforcement but no (or very little) negative reinforcement, especially from her parents, who probably went out of their way to keep people like teachers from correcting that imbalance. It seems pretty likely.
Then you jumped on him for stating it in a more general way (which criticism I agree with) and therefore apparently missing the original point completely, turning the thread into a retarded morass of pendantic dickweedery instead of making fun of the stupid girl. Which is surely what some people prefer, but meh.
-
@DogsB said in There's no P in hamster...:
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
@levicki said in There's no P in hamster...:
@remi said in There's no P in hamster...:
My dog knows very well that I don't want her to eat shit.
You might want to supplement her diet with some vitamins. Also, taking dog out for a walk when it is sated instead of hungry helps.
I know, and I've tried various things, with little success (it was worse when she was younger, though). Ultimately the main factor is that she's a Lab and is therefore always, always hungry. This is not a figure of speech, it's been shown that Labs are missing some genes about satiety and they are literally always hungry (they share this trait with a couple of other breeds such as retrievers, and ours is a cross between a lab... and a retriever!). That was (indirectly) selected for over the years as this makes them very eager to learn (any edible treat will get you their full attention). It's also what makes labs so prone to becoming obese, and we're literally weighting the food we give her to keep her in shape.
It's kind of sad when you think about it but... that's how it is!
On the bright side we get videos like this out of them!
Reminds me of this:
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
making fun of the stupid girl.
It's only fun for a really short while. Demonstration above!
-
FWIW I would respond passive aggressively at first, starting with her name and altering it (you know, that thing Millenials do). Then, all correspondance will be coloured.
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Your original argument was that positive reinforcement was a problem.
I read it as saying that was the P-girl's problem. More specifically, that she got lots of positive reinforcement but no (or very little) negative reinforcement, especially from her parents, who probably went out of their way to keep people like teachers from correcting that imbalance. It seems pretty likely.
Then you jumped on him for stating it in a more general way (which criticism I agree with) and therefore apparently missing the original point completely, turning the thread into a retarded morass of pendantic dickweedery instead of making fun of the stupid girl. Which is surely what some people prefer, but meh.
Negative reinforcement isn't quite what you make it out to be and is actually the root of problems in the case of helicopter parents - "negative" has a different meaning in this case: It's not a "bad" thing but it merely means: "Taking away something".
Example: Your kid throws a snit over not wanting to eat its vegetables. You promptly take away the offending vegetables (the "negative" part). Thus the kid has promptly learned that throwing a tantrum will remove those vegetables and will be more likely to do so in the future (the "reinforcement" part).
In short: Not letting your kid deal with the frustration of failure but removing all impediments is negative reinforcement.
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
Your original argument was that positive reinforcement was a problem.
I read it as saying that was the P-girl's problem. More specifically, that she got lots of positive reinforcement but no (or very little) negative reinforcement, especially from her parents, who probably went out of their way to keep people like teachers from correcting that imbalance. It seems pretty likely.
Then you jumped on him for stating it in a more general way (which criticism I agree with) and therefore apparently missing the original point completely, turning the thread into a retarded morass of pendantic dickweedery instead of making fun of the stupid girl. Which is surely what some people prefer, but meh.
Negative reinforcement isn't quite what you make it out to be and is actually the root of problems in the case of helicopter parents - "negative" has a different meaning in this case: It's not a "bad" thing but it merely means: "Taking away something".
Example: Your kid throws a snit over not wanting to eat its vegetables. You promptly take away the offending vegetables (the "negative" part). Thus the kid has promptly learned that throwing a tantrum will remove those vegetables and will be more likely to do so in the future (the "reinforcement" part).
In short: Not letting your kid deal with the frustration of failure but removing all impediments is negative reinforcement.
Well, whatever, I'm not a psychology nerd, but I also didn't miss his point.
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
Well, whatever, I'm not a psychology nerd, but I also didn't miss his point.
Well, if you're using psychology terms to denigrate psychology then maybe you should get it right.
Unless you want to look like someone who says that mathematics is for idiots and, as an example, say that 2+2=5.
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
Well, whatever, I'm not a psychology nerd, but I also didn't miss his point.
Well, if you're using psychology terms to denigrate psychology then maybe you should get it right.
If I ever do that I'll consider it.
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
Well, whatever, I'm not a psychology nerd, but I also didn't miss his point.
Well, if you're using psychology terms to denigrate psychology then maybe you should get it right.
If I ever do that I'll consider it.
Right. So you weren't just talking about how I "misunderstood" his point using psychology terms which you yourself demonstrably do not understand.
I'm impressed. This, by the way, is the 2+2 of psychology.
-
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
@Rhywden said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
Well, whatever, I'm not a psychology nerd, but I also didn't miss his point.
Well, if you're using psychology terms to denigrate psychology then maybe you should get it right.
If I ever do that I'll consider it.
Right. So you weren't just talking about how I "misunderstood" his point using psychology terms which you yourself demonstrably do not understand.
I'm talking about how you psychology nerded out instead of participating in communication and understanding what he was saying.
I'm impressed. This, by the way, is the 2+2 of psychology.
I'm probably saying this wrong, but it seems pretty narcissistic to me to equate personal attacks on you with attacks on psychology.
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
I'm talking about how you psychology nerded out instead of participating in communication and understanding what he was saying.
But @levicky ended up doubling down, which kept the thread entertaining, so I don't see the issue. Or is topic drift in the side bar suddenly a bad thing?
-
@dfdub said in There's no P in hamster...:
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
I'm talking about how you psychology nerded out instead of participating in communication and understanding what he was saying.
But @levicky ended up doubling down, which kept the thread entertaining, so I don't see the issue. Or is topic drift in the side bar suddenly a bad thing?
Depends on where the current goes, as always. And yes, @levicki is not his best advocate.
It occurs to me now that I was confusing feedback with reinforcement and suspect @levicki was too. You nerds.
-
@HardwareGeek said in There's no P in hamster...:
Corgis are said to have the instinctive ability to stop eating one bite short of exploding like Mr. Creosote
Corgis don't care for waffer-thin mints?
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
Depends on where the current goes, as always.
Honestly, I think the forum has become quite tame in that regard since blakey and a few others left. Which is one of the reasons why I finally created an account.
-
@dfdub it's kind of a pet peeve of mine to see someone ignore what seems like the obvious point someone is making and go to war over some irrelevant detail that turns out to be a typo or a term that isn't correct. A quick joke is one thing but that's not what happened here.
-
@boomzilla Again, blakeyrat is gone, so that must be a rather rare occurrence now compared to two years ago.
I understand the frustration, since I would also like to continue talking about the original topic sometimes, but it feels like you're complaining about the spirit of the forum now. And you're the one who has the power to Jeff things.
-
@dfdub I just like to yell at @Rhywden sometimes when he does this. I wouldn't read too much into that. But I suppose I was channeling blakey a bit.
-
@dfdub said in There's no P in hamster...:
And you're the one who has the power to Jeff things.
He does, but I think the standard response is
-
@dfdub said in There's no P in hamster...:
And you're the one who has the power to Jeff things.
The power yes, but the will
-
@boomzilla said in There's no P in hamster...:
But I suppose I was channeling blakey a bit.
So you're the same person after all! Finally, we got some proof!
Hampster Dance - Wikipedia
