This is our monthly place to discuss relevant topics that have not appeared in recent posts.
Dear Prof. Hanson,
one more question:
What is real time internet?
I found a reference to this question in a talk by Stephen Chu (http://www.ustream.tv/recor... - starting 26.30min
Stephen Chu: "[...] the internet, where there are 24 million hits, in case you are wondering, in point one five seconds [...]"
I assumed Prof. Chu either meant 1.5 seconds or 0.15 seconds.
So I did some math and this came out:
Internet live stats for 24million/0.15 seconds
160 000 000 clicks per second4 000 000 clicks per blink of an eye3 200 000 clicks per Hummingbird Wingbeat2666666.7 clicks per Flash Shutter Sync0.16 clicks per nanosecond0.000 000 000 16 clicks per attosecond0.000 000 000 000 000 16 clicks per yoktosecond
Internet live stats for 24million/1.5 seconds
16 000 000 clicks per second400 000 clicks per blink of an eye320 000 clicks per Hummingbird Wingbeat266666.7 clicks per Flash Shutter Sync0.016 clicks per nanosecond0.000 000 000 016 clicks per attosecond0.000 000 000 000 000 016 clicks per yoktosecond
I was in awe by these numbers and began to think about it.If the estimation is correct and there are around two billion internet users for 2010, these live stats seem to be pretty intense.
If the internet consists of 160 million clicks per second (avg), this would mean that on avg. every internet user is making a click every 12.5 seconds
If the internet consists of 16 million clicks per second you still get 125 seconds for every internet user.
I am guessing these numbers come up because of automated spam etc. or we are really a bunch of intensive internet users :)
What is your opinion on this?
peace and conflict studies:
Some conflicts cannot be solved in a specific moment in time, but all conflicts can be solved over time.
do you agree?
You asked about a good overview of how pastoralism is different from other ways of subsistence. Check out The Nomadic Alternative by Barfield. Very concise, clearly written, enough theory to be engaging but with lots of empirical coverage to keep it from being sterile and fake.
What are the correlates of correctness (besides, I assume, a little-known rock band)?
Specifically, I'm interested in whether there have been systematic studies of resolved factual controversies, which studies have produced empirically-based heuristics which may help us to: -reason more effectively -better assess each other's assertions
Highest status is usually to completely ignore most people.
What's the social value of concise speech? Many of the high status people I've met didn't have a lot of words. Their arguments were also very taut and compact.
Let's assume you are a college professor who genuinely wants to serve his students in the best way possible. Let's also assume the signalling hypothesis about education--namely, it's 80 percent signalling and 20 percent "substance."
How do you teach? Do you work to eliminate signalling as much as possible? How does this change the standard dynamic of teaching? What if you teaching a sophomore-level literature course? Or grad students in an Econonics seminar? What's your pedagogy?