My guess is that when the kids' faces were right up to the light, their subconscious mind was actually doing the triggering because the light change was noticed in their peripheral vision. At my kung fu school, we train ourselves to avoid focusing our vision on the person we're fighting because acute vision is translated/filtered by the conscious mind; the tiny delays caused by the conscious mind are enough to get you killed. Acute->Conscious reaction times are far slower than Peripheral->SubConscious reactions.
You'd probably see similar results in your experiment if you had the kids stand close to the light but focus their vision just outside the perimeter of the light.
> In fact you can argue, people who are successful inside the system because they have the attributes you mentioned, are the least motivated to challenge the status quo.
Confidence that your contribution is worthwhile goes a long way. Most of the people I know that do not consider themselves to be "creative" are simply unwilling to take the risk that their final product will not be praised/enjoyed. They fool themselves into believing that a work is wasted time if it is not the next Mona Lisa.
I think there is also a "blank page" component. They worry about wasting time and having to redo work. Many people are simply unsure where to start, focused on the forest when they haven't yet created the first tree. They're not comfortable working on different components of the problem and trusting that at some point they'll be able to connect the dots.
Creative entrepreneurs have programmed themselves to see the journey as the reward, learning at every step regardless of outcome and applying those lessons immediately to the following steps. They redo, pivot or do whatever is necessary to get closer to the goal because they've realized (subconsciously) that the current action is already in the past. They can't change the past so moving forward is the only action they are concerned with.
This is a key point. Also, it's easy to "like" something if there is only one button. I feel I'm doing my friends a favor.
When there are multiple buttons, I feel like I'm doing work for the website operator. The only exception would be the case where the content is really so awesome that I feel the whole world needs to know about it.
My first thought after reading about how it works was "How can we consolidate all the vendors into a single 'like' button?"
Someone like add this may create one. There are already plenty of ways you can turn a like into a share on facebook, twitter, Tumblr etc instapaper's new social options is one
I dislike interview questions that sound like they were pulled from some industry certification test. What's the point in asking people questions that test their memory?
Today the fact is that we DO have Google and other tools at our fingertips. If it means that we have fewer definitions and facts committed to memory, so be it. It's not a bad thing to look up information on an as-needed basis. The information will be fresher and likely accompanied by recent developments. Even doctors do this when they're about to perform an operation they haven't done in a while.... they'll look up the procedure beforehand and refresh their memory to ensure that they follow the current standard of care.
Interview questions should focus on exposing problem-solving ability and getting to know the person to determine whether he/she is a good fit for your existing team.
Based on the movie, Zuckerberg didn't have the decency to inform the people he was working with that he'd moved on. The moment he stopped communicating with them, a red flag should have gone up and they should have parted ways and hired someone else. Both sides contributed to the end result. The Winkelvii should have been more closely involved with the execution of the project. They should have also formalized the relationship legally before allowing him to work on it.
If there is a cognitive universal, I wonder if it is absolute. Does it describe the nature of cognition itself or does it only describe cognition we do it here on earth.
IOW: will sufficiently evolved lifeforms on other planets have similar experiences (and therefore a basis for common ground) or will we be completely unable to understand them? Maybe we're receiving transmissions right now and we just don't see it.
If a cognitive universal exists, then true artificial intelligence must -by definition- "think like us" because that's how thinking works.
This one seems to work: http://globalfilesearch.com/
http://globalfilesearch.net/index.aspx?q=.eap&t=Files...