MD – Feb 1 2012
The emotional brain is certainly highly sensitized to all sort of emotional input, but does this necessarily nullify human control of even the chiefist of impulses? Most Yanks (and Brits) exercise impulse control through established value systems, further directing impulse and desire. Yet this appears to be minimized in your analysis (excellent by the way). Yet I would argue that an established Value model, along with such amazing processing of environmental data, further separates human from non-human, and makes me and “You” special!

Finally, I wonder if your description of the dual coordination of old and emotional brains must always end in memory etching? Gate theory suggests a filtering process directing emotion, desire, and impulse toward or away from memory etching. Hence, input control.

Love your work!

From the Yank side,

MD
MD

It being TDWTF, 90% of the comments were debating what ‘wat’ means and how to pronounce it and the rest were about how the presentation wasn’t funny and the audience sucked.

I don’t get it

Javascript confuses me.

As for Ruby, it is actually because of the parser.

When the parser sees

a = a

it believes that a was already created.

Or rather, it seems to not check about it at all. There is probably a reason why this was not changed, probably because it can’t be easily changed.

To those who have never seen anything more than phpbb’s templates and javascript, here are some pointers from one that actually handles types much better:

>>> [] + []
[]
>>> {} + {}
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: ‘dict’ and ‘dict’
>>> {} + []
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: ‘dict’ and ‘list’
>>> [] + {}
TypeError: can only concatenate list (not “dict”) to list
>>> “wat” – 1
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for -: ‘str’ and ‘int’

I’m already fed up of google displaying some results that catch my eye whilst I’m typing, but which have vanished by the time I stop pressing keys.