For example, there’s no truth to the idea that
the brain is half android and half artist, with
a left hemisphere dedicated to logic and analytical
thinking and a right hemisphere for intuition and
creativity.
But! Each hemisphere does tend to sequester different specialties, as is evidenced by stroke victims, no?
Yes, I believe you are referencing Wernicke’s and Broca’s aphasia — which may occur after a stroke depending on which hemisphere was affected. But different specialties in the brain does not enforce the idea that the left part is logical and right part is creative.
This kind of speaks to a premise discussed later on in the article regarding the manner in which the gist of interesting trivia tends to drift as time passes, the longer trivia is in play and the greater currency it gains among laymen and non-experts.
Starting with the words:
In a decades-long game of telephone [...]
The article points to an effect in the field of neuroscience that is not unlike The Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect.
It still doesn’t make any sense. There’s nothing in the article that suggests Indians are shy about seeing a dermatologist, which is what the title implies.
Its for an Indian audience... you are reading connotations into a word based on a foreign context.
If the article was "AI-enabled dermatology app aims to save Americans embarrassing visits to the doc" would you still feel weird about it? I see headlines like "X aims to help Americans do Y" all the time, no complaints.
To an Indian audience, "Indians" is roughly synonymous to people.. pretty neutral word.
Plenty of people get embarrassed about things like this. It doesn't need to be suggesting Indians are more embarrassed than others because this is an Indian startup launching a product in India.
Hush! Don't speak of such things, or before you know it there will be DRM enforced IoT dongles with 4G cellular radios, requiring a subscription plan and annual fee before the guitar pick-ups will serialize their signal to a 1/4 inch patch cable.
These days, though, there's an odd mix of typists, because everyone is self taught, and most people have begun typing as soon as they learn how to read and write.
Both touch typing and hunt and peck typing are in severe decline. Mobile devices have created all kinds of mutants, and no one gives a shit about "the home row" anymore. I watch those old videos about posture and training oneself to type without looking at the keyboard by typing endless garbage over and over, and I have to laugh, because I've never seen anything less important seem like such obvious brainwashing.
WPM is an archaic metric, and as my top speed I target only a reasonable conversational pace in chat windows, comparable to verbal conversation. Anything more is kind of a waste. As long as people don't feel like my pace of typing is lagging during a chat, I don't really need to be much faster than that.
I don't have a problem meeting those demands, and composing my thoughts, and contemplating what I wish to type usually consumes more time than the act of typing itself.
Bandwidth measured in bytes probably makes more sense these days. But again, I haven't bothered to measure how fast I type, other than a gut intuition for how often I get sniped in chat rooms, when people beat me and say something before I can, alongside how impatient people seem to get with me.
Since when is voluntary experimentation on a test rig, under controlled circumstances, criminally stupid? It’s not like this was a passenger flight.
It would warrant criticism if the pilot tried it without informing the crew prior to takeoff. All participants entered into the activity with an understanding that they were risking their lives.
These people did it because they enjoyed the challenge, not to score points with corporate overlords or jockey for a raise and a promotion. The marketing angle was simply to provide cost justification and demonstrate that a perceptible reward would be earned with the risk undertaken.
That's a optimistic reading of the article. The article states it was for marketing reasons, and also states that they had several plan threating outcomes that were not planned for.
If it where in the context of understanding the plane's behavior at trans-sonic speeds, I can understand it, but that is not really given as a justification.
If you read the parts where they mention “buffeting” that’s the dangerous part, where uneven airflow introduces instability, causing the airframe to rattle.
Buffeting occurs when the soundwaves of the noise of the craft and its motion directly affect the air as it flows across the surface of the plane.
This happens as the plane enters the shockwave of the sound barrier, and ceases when they accelerate beyond the speed of sound.
At and beyond Mach 1 the buffeting is behind the plane, and flight is smoother, with no rattling or shaking from the incidental turbulence.
It also happens when decelerating, although it’s easier to decelerate safely through the buffeting quickly, since less time is spent in the shockwave, and a reduction in speed grants improved control.
Is that supposed to be "trucking business" or is there some other business like souping up automobiles, referred to in a regional dialect I'm unfamiliar with?
EDIT: ...probably one of the anticipated phone typos, fat fingering 'i' instead of the 'u' key.
