My head hurts too much to read the paper right now, but I suspect that most of this can be attributed to learning, and that a 'causal understanding' is not being demonstrated here.

The important figure to look at here is Fig 3, specifically the first trial in figure 3, before the crows had a change to learn each particular task. Performance is, slightly, better than chance for each task except tasks D and F. But these are NOT naive birds. There are only 6 crows used in this experiment, and before the experiment they were all trained to perform a water displacement task for food reward. The better than chance performance on the first trial for some of the tasks could, and probably is, a result of the similarity between the 'correct' choice in that task and the training condition.
A: A water filled tube is more like the water filled tube in the training condition, than is a sand filled tube.
B: Heavy blocks are more like the heavy stones used in the training condition than are the light blocks.
C: Solid black weights are more like the black stones used in the training condition than are the hollow cages.
E: A nearly full tube is more similar to the training condition (which took only two stones to reach the food) than a nearly empty tube.
Tasks D and F, where the crows did not perform better than chance, have choices much more difficult to distinguish from the training condition (with both choices in F being nearly identical to the training condition).
What's more, the sample size is tiny, with a max of 6 birds for any task, and only 4 of these same (very experienced) birds for tasks E and F. You cannot do meaningful statistics with a sample size of 4.
If someone who has actually read the whole paper wants to show me how I'm wrong please do. Until then, I think the editors at PLoS ONE need to be more careful with their choice of reviewers. The journal, although noble in it's stated mission, is still young, and its reputation is still fragile.
"Our results indicate that New Caledonian crows possess a sophisticated, but incomplete, understanding of the causal properties of displacement, rivalling that of 5–7 year old children." How on earth did they let that pass! They know the press will have a field-day with misleading statements like that.

I guess I should clarify; I think that the pace of our advances is being bottlenecked by our current system because we (as nations) continue to exploit via a relentless focus on profit rather than try to actually spread knowledge and tech as best we can.

A free education system for the world would be incredibly easy to achieve with our current technology, but as nations we don't even try to aim for such a thing. As universities and other education institutions (publishing companies, etc), we have no incentive to truly aim for this in the current paradigm because it reverses profit growth (which, honestly, in the case of education, is pretty much all over-inflated anyway). There's no malicious intent, no conspiracy, and noble goals abound, but we're doing it at a snail's pace out of selfishness.

Individual people act much more nobly than large, well-established institutions. You see a rather strong trend of such large groups behaving closer to the "rational" approach from economic game theory, i.e. the one where self-preservation and gain are maximized first and foremost. If we just rely on our institutions to fix the problems at their root or think that the incidental improvements tied to increased tech and knowledge are being nurtured even half as well as they could be, I think we'd be gravely mistaken.

I think we both ultimately hope for the same outcome, but we clearly disagree on the extent to which our current society(/societies) effectively move towards those outcomes. I would personally like to see us double down on those things that help move us forward.

EDIT: Some examples of ways we're bullshitting ourselves and not doing half as much as we could, for your pleasure.

Princeton University's motto is "In the service of the nation and of all nations" (probably slightly off on the phrasing, sorry), and they have BILLIONS of dollars of endowment. If they and their alumni network took this motto seriously, with their knowledge of business, tech, and science, they could easily bring entire nations out of poverty by simply helping local people adapt tech in sustainable ways to provide food for their population more easily, institute strong education access, and more. Harvard, Oxford, all the other big names are in similar situations. They can do SO MUCH, but just do little projects while answering to their boards about making sure to keep the cash flow positive, keep the endowment growing, keep using alumni donations to pay for things where possible. It's bullshit.

Most large organized religions are also lazy about service. There are many who do seriously just aim at food and medical aid, but most are more interested in conversions and extra tithes than eliminating poverty. How many Christian missionaries of various sects are there around the world? Of them, how many devote their missions to actual service of everyone they can to show their religion through their works as opposed to just focusing on bringing people into the fold via preaching? Additionally, the old "teach a man to fish" concept comes into play here; giving food is good, but we need to be helping people help themselves as well so that they can thrive.

I know shit is very complicated and the answers aren't easy, but we can EASILY do better than this.

so glad you hit the sarcasm button there copper-C, way to waffle and save whatever face you imagine you have_an apology would be the noble thing, simply hit sarcasm and downvote my sentiment-Yeah, I'm a real pervert maestro-

@newtboy
"i know you are but what am i i"?

that had me cackling like a loon.bravo my friend.

please understand guys my comment is in reference to this particular thread,not any previous private or otherwise.

my commentary was also tongue-n-cheek and not to be taken too seriously.
i was poking the hornets nest...like a boss..who also happens to be a dick.

please forgive.

as for conflicting private to public messages.
well..that would infuriate me as well newt.you wont get an argument from me on that point.
that speaks to a persons character and integrity and explains a ton in regards to your attitude towards @chingalera.

our integrity is all we have.
when you take away everything,the only thing left we have to trade is our word.
our honor.
our respect for another human being.
when we lose that trust....we lose everything.

i do not know the particulars on how you all conversed in private.its none of my business and not my place to judge.

but if what you are saying is true newt (and i have no reason to believe it isnt.there is a past precedent in that regard) then i have to ask @chingalera why?

why say one thing in private and then another in public?
that is so disengenuious and un-necessary my man.
you make good solid points..often,and often i agree with them.
so why would invalidate them by interacting with such duplicity?

you cant call out newt for disregarding or dismissing your points because it was YOU who invalidated those points by your interactions with him.

and you know this.
dont act like you dont because i know your smarter than the average bear.so dont insult my intelligence by feigning innocence.

you owe newt an apology.period.

and dont prove @VoodooV right.we both were there when you flamed out and it was ugly.
and you made it ugly by taking it personal.
i never judged you for that..still dont.
but that does not mean i condoned how you played that closing scene out.
real people had real feelings hurt...including you.

now i realize this thread is destroyed and i dont even know who i need to apologize to.
so...
to the original poster:i am truly sorry for this tragic hi-jacking of your thread.

but it appears necessary.

@chingalera i realize that much of what you do is to shock people out of complacency.
to get them to perceive a situation with different goggles.
many times the weapons you use are confrontational language and a persistence that rivals the most glorious case of OCD.

those intentions are noble.
i agree and am of a similar mindset.this is probably why i can read choggie-speak with little trouble.

i understand what you are trying to do.

but how can you expect someone like @newtboy to listen to anything you have to say when you cant keep even basic correspondence open and honest?
it invalidates everything you attempt from then on out.
your words have to have the weight of your integrity behind them for them to have ANY impact.
you lose that and your words become dust.

sounds like you will have to work to gain the respect from @newtboy.i wish you well in that endeavour.

please understand i consider you a friend @chingalera and hearing this has upset me a great deal.

and @VoodooV,
you may be right brother.i do not know what the future brings.hopefully ching will prove you wrong.i know he could if he wanted.

but i disagree with keeping the riff raff out.
i dont mind confrontation or arguments.in fact i LOVE them and @chingalera has a talent for poking the hornets nest and shattering the monotone-vanilla-circle-jerk-clones into a frenzy.

and that my friend..is a good thing.

@chingalera keeps the locals buzzing,constantly challenging pre-concieved notions and ideologies and i love that fucker for that.he keeps this site interesting.his antics bring lurkers to actually comment/post and others who usually side-line to jump in.

all good things.

but...
i cannot abide the darker side.
the hurtful side.
maybe i am being naive'....i always see redemption for those who the entrenched masses see as unredeemable.i always feel i can save those who are truly lost.

i always see the human first and the actions last.

so you may be right.i just hope you are wrong.
maybe this thread will impact my friend and remind him we are all humans.

i dont know.........
i hope though...
i hope.

@ChaosEngine again,as i told newtboy,no argument here.
hopefully this derailed thread has cleared some air and brought the things to the table that needed to be discussed.

which from my viewpoint is about integrity.
you cant admonish people for being egocentric and then turn around and be egocentric yourself.
it weakens the very position you were trying to make in the first place.(ching,not you CE).
it is hypocritical.

i am a dissident.
a radical.
a subversive.
even to the church i am an apostate.
so i understand @chingalera on a certain level.he has never treated me other than a friend and compatriot.so it pains me to see how he deals with those he disagrees with,and just how far he will take a story to a painful conclusion.
this does not give be joy or pleasure.

he is a righteous dude.passionate,sensitive and creative and has soooo much to offer.
im sorry ya'all didnt get to see that side of him.
but maybe thats on him,because you all should.

there is a reason he has been invited back multiple times and its not because he whined about it but rather he truly is an exceptional human being.

maybe he should show that side more.
takes honesty and courage,but that boy has a huge capacity for that.

@chingalera
balls in your court brother.
what ya gonna do?

*note* for all those who read to this point.
cookies and milk will be served in the back storage room.
free fondlings for the ladies.
dont forget to tip your bartenders and waitresses!

At a trial it is important (although not the main focus, proving there was a murder and whether or not the defendant committed the murder is). But this senator isn't at trial or talking about a trial, he's talking about introducing a law and for that purpose the motive is (for him) irrelevant.

Think about the murder example. It's illegal for one person to deliberately kill another person. There are many noble reasons why you might want to kill someone and there are certain circumstances where it's OK (self defence or soldiers at war) but in every other case it's illegal. It's even illegal if the person being murdered wants to be murdered.

I personally think that last bit is as wrong as the anti abortion laws but that's another debate entirely...

But for the purposes of the law the motivation behind the murder really doesn't matter. You could be doing it for the best of reasons but it's still murder. Same for the senator and his legislation. The reasons are just irrelevant. Maybe they would be relevant if a person was brought to trial under the laws proposed in the legislation, but that's for the courts to decide.

Carlin, Stanhope, and Tosh make rape not only hilarious, but awesome!

Surprise Buttsechs is a noble art form

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Wings, skillful' to 'Oregon, helicopter, chrismas trees, Noble Mountain Christmas Tree Farm, Dan Clark' - edited by eric3579

Ha. You know, when I first got into LA back in 1999, it had started to lightly drizzle, and I was on my way to buy a book from Barnes and Noble at the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica.

I got no more than a few steps onto the Promenade before I see a news team with a plastic wrapped camera. The instant they see me, it was like Christmas morning to them, because I was wearing a short sleeve shirt and carried no umbrella. In fact, I remember thinking how odd it was to see people covering up as if it were a monsoon sweeping through LA. They sprint for me. The camera goes up. And the mic goes into my face, and it's like, "Why are you dressed like this in the rain?" It was surreal. To them, this was fucking news!

But I must admit that since being in LA for 14 years, I am not a big pussy when it comes to rain. Time in a place changes you. Now, to me, the light drizzle feels like a monsoon and I have to get out of it pronto! Ha.

About a week ago I opened my wallet at a bar or a bank or something, and I received a compliment for having a library card in my wallet. O.G. Huntington Beach and Westminster Library card holder representin'!

Before the internet, the common man was dumber than shit and my edge was that I read books at the library. In fact, it was NOT cool to know things about things.

Now I'm comparitively dumb because motherfuckers be like "3rd law of thermodynamics, pssshhh, I know EVERYTHING bout that." /ALTAVISTA

I mean, that's cool that people know things now --but, damn, having that edge was really nice.

And then I had the internet and no one did, and my edge was even huger. I made bank designing shitty ass webpages for shitty ass old people with shitty ass businesses. Now everyone gots it and the people with money laid down the pressure and it's a machine of controlled behavior and wallet squeezing. (I squeeze wallets for a living but it's more in sync with Winston Smith working for big bro.)

But I digress... Shhhhh, I'm on my iPhone -- nope, A BOOK.

Bring it back! Don't let Barnes & Nobles close dooooowwwwn. You may dis on the B&N, but that's part of the levee of popular opinion; how assholes of the future will monetize. If our corporate overlords and money trading thugs realize that books ain't selling, they won't hesitate to shut down a library. For the people. For the taxes. For God. You got a book. It's the bible now STFU.

Then we'll only have the internet and information will successfully be filtered down into an easily manipulated data stream -- which it is, but it's not fully there yet. We need to INTEGRATE FACEBOOK WITH EVERY ASPECT OF EXISTENCE.

Shut down all printing presses. When you pick up a book in the future it will turn to dust in your hands and then the CAVE PEOPLE WILL DEVOUR YOU.

Brains. Brains. Nom. Guts and gore. Your children will be eaten alive; torn to shreds, while blood flows out of their arteries into the machines of death.. Force fucked women of your sub-species impregnated by the semen of the dead in order to make more food. More foooooooooooooood -- YOUR PROGENY ARE FOOD.

And all because of the system which interrupts a motherfuck for reading a book.

"to me life is about progressing"
Yeah, that sounds very developing and shit, but i doubt breaking bones is really "learning and progressing", this is just ego, adrenalin chasing, limit-pushing non-evolutionary barely for any benefits, non-beneficial, dangerous fun stunts...

I don't have a problem with them doing insane stuff and dying or whatnot.
But wrapping it up like some noble life achieving struggle for something amazing is just BS.

@bcglorf

i attempt to convey a point and you shift the point.
i address the point you move the goal posts.

ok..how about this.
lets say i agree that sometimes force is a necessary tool?
(which i do actually).
and how about we amend that YOU as an american stay the fuck out of it and sit your pretentious ass down and let those who actually would benefit do the violence.

or is YOUR force somehow more righteous and noble than some others?

hypocrisy AND arrogance..
yeah..they hate us for our freedom.thats it...has to be.
wouldnt happen to have anything to do with us being pretentious hypocritical cunts.

sorry man.
i have failed to convey a point that to me is self evident and non-controversial.

we as a country are cunts.arrogant,hypocritical cunts.
who are just scared over-grown children.

the army is accepting applications.maybe you can be a drone pilot and kill you some brown people!
you seem awfully enthusiastic in bringing the violence.
america hurrah..fuck yeah.

sorry bc.
cant help ya.
seems my failure is total.

If you say we needn't accept a lesser evil then please do share it with us. Simply walking away and ignoring the taliban as they slaughter thousands of Pakistani's every month in their quest to over throw the Pakistani government doesn't seem to me like some noble and 'good' course of action. If you've managed to discover a course of action here worthy of the name 'good' or even just not 'bad' I'm all ears.

@bcglorf

i think it is rather you who missed my point and are aligning with the same argument @A10anis laid out.

i am not dismissing the horrific violence perpetrated by "terrorists".
what i AM dismissing is the "lesser of two evils" premise.

because it is hypocrisy on steroids.

now i realize you and i highly disagree on this matter.
thats ok..we can disagree.

people can use all the nationalistic jingoism they wish to make this situation a more "feel good" narrative.
they can point to the dead,tortured and beheaded to justify their own brand of violence.
they can flag-wave and pat themselves on the back that our form of violence is somehow "less" violent and "more" noble.

and it still would not change the fact that the reasons behind normal people turning to fundamentalist,reactionary violent groups can be found at our own feet.

this is the part of the equation that so many people i talk to seem to either willingly or unwittingly...ignore.

responsibility lies at the feet of those who created this violent ballet,just as it does with those who perpetrate the violence.

its like you hitting me in the face everyday at school and one day i hit you back.
but with a bat.
and you run to the principle and cry to have me arrested for hitting you in the face with a bat.
ignoring the fact you had been violent with me for many days prior.

moral question:who is wrong?
or in the context of this discussion:who is more evil?

I loved that segment when I watched the episode -- Ross Noble putting the whole tin directly on his face had me rolling.

I am pretty strongly anti-smoking, and this made me wonder why smokers (especially those that already want to quit) don't try to switch to snuff more often. Why isn't there some sort of movement to promote that? Shit-stain handkerchiefs and slight increase in naso-pharyngeal cancer rates seems like an easy trade to make over smelling horrendous, greatly increased lung cancer rates for yourself and probably loved ones as well, etc. etc.

Maybe in some of those places in the US where state and local governments are trying to curb smoking rates via extreme taxes or outright public-space bans, they should be promoting or providing a (comparative) tax break for snuff. I'd happily wander through a crowd of brown-handkerchief folks loitering around entrances to public buildings instead of a noxious smoke-cloud.