The greatest comedian of Colombia, Andrés López, wrote exclusively for Diners magazine humor a brilliant piece on global warming. Lefty vision of a tragedy that lurks. Recreation and leisure photographic camera Mauricio Vélez. Show only to Diners.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Find Shemale In Abu Dhabi
The planet earth is hot and Rational Animals
The greatest comedian of Colombia, Andrés López, wrote exclusively for Diners magazine humor a brilliant piece on global warming. Lefty vision of a tragedy that lurks. Recreation and leisure photographic camera Mauricio Vélez. Show only to Diners.
The greatest comedian of Colombia, Andrés López, wrote exclusively for Diners magazine humor a brilliant piece on global warming. Lefty vision of a tragedy that lurks. Recreation and leisure photographic camera Mauricio Vélez. Show only to Diners.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Poptropica Credit Genarator
ANIMALS AND SOUND
The Prisoner's Dilemma
An ominous paradox reason that leads to collective destruction
The tragedy of the commons, enunciated by Hardin, shows that what belongs to everyone, to no one and is likely to deteriorate completely
MANUEL PRIETO DIAZ
Police arrested two suspects of a crime, isolates, and suggests everyone the same treatment: "If you confess and your accomplice chooses not to speak, he would fall 10 years in prison and you go free. But if he confesses and you decide not to, the conviction will be for you and freedom for him. Even if the two decide not letting go, we will let you go after a brief arrest. And, if both confess, both be condemned to six years. "The Prisoner's Dilemma is a fascinating and sinister paradox well known and studied game theory in which the prisoners tend to confess and that whatever the choice of another, the punishment always confessing is reduced. Unfortunately for them, both choose to betray and two receive long sentences. A result known as suboptimal.
This dilemma shows that although from the perspective of the group it would be best to cooperate, rational egoism leads them to do so. behavior of which there are many examples in the present and serves to illustrate the tragedy of the commons, a concept created by biologist Garrett Hardin in 1968 and could summarized in the phrase so internalized in our values: what belongs to everyone, to no one, why not throw the paper on the floor if that comes back will do the same?
Hardin explained it to families of farmers who own animals share a common grazing. So when you consider adding one more animal to his herd They weigh the benefits of doing it themselves (+ 1) and on the other hand, the damage that overgrazing will for the community and for oneself. But in this case the consequences are shared by all, the negative utility for each farmer to take this decision is only a fraction of -1. Therefore, according to Hardin, Always Faithful decanting just by adding more animals and thereby ruining all the grass.
Since Hardin Sciencie article published in The tragedy of the common, the situation has shown signs of improvement and the ordinary - the water, fish stocks, forests, shoreline or street furniture continued supporting unsustainable pressure. In this context it is very enlightening to final essay by Jared Diamond, Collapse, where he talks about how societies choose to fail or succeed. The geographer quotes tragedy of the commons and the prisoner's dilemma to show how in the past various human societies, according to decisions taken in times of crisis, have been preserved or have followed the path of extinction. The parallels to this are disturbing. Diamond presents cases catastrophic Easter Island, Norse Greenland and the Maya culture, and compares them with the civilization of Pitcairn and Henderson Islands, the Inuit of Greenland and Iceland. Why the first
expired, and the second managed to survive? According to Diamond - who won the Pulitzer Prize with his first essay on the causes of the wealth of developed countries, Guns, Germs and Steel ", there are five factors that influence
the possible extinction of a company's attack enemies, loss of support of friendly societies, climate change, the social, political or religious because of these changes and human impact on the environment. Only one of these factors is capable of causing a catastrophe, but there is no doubt that the combination of two or more constitutes an imminent danger to any society.
The well-known example of Easter, isolated from the rest of the world, with food resources and aquifers very meager and, in particular, dominated by a divided society that puts the competition to build ever-larger statues, it seems a metaphor for our planet. Because of the various factors that led to its decline, the irresponsible action stands environmental human.
In its effort to erect monoliths more impressive than those of their neighbors, their inhabitants do not hesitate to completely wipe out the trees on the island, especially with a giant plant variety which depended
stability of its ecosystem. And Diamond concludes that, like the ancient inhabitants of Easter Island, we could not escape the Earth in case of such a disaster. "If I caught that fish or let my sheep eat the grass - Diamond writes," another fisherman or herder will anyway, so that makes no sense to refrain from abusing me fishing or grazing " . The correct rational behavior is to exploit then the action before the next consumer can do, even if the end result may be the destruction of the ordinary and therefore the damage to all consumers. In fact, although this logic has led many community resources are over exploited in excess to be eliminated, others have survived after having been exploited for hundreds or even thousands of years. Exaggerate "Diamond in the diagnosis? From the field of environmental protection is no shortage every day voices that give the reason or have a more troubling scenario: "This planet is home to 20 to 100 million different plants - Joaquín Araújo says the naturalist, author of Echoes ... logic, to understand the ecology-, 25% of this vast wealth is in danger. Each day, for decades, from one to 140 species may be fired for always avoidable expelled by human activities. A rate to be compared with the average extinction per year has been the rule that there is life on the planet. Consumption is exacerbated at the base of the problem: at the current rate, the collapse is literally guaranteed half a century before.
The glass half full But there are voices critical of the geographer prestige to put emphasis on the bottle as half empty. One is Gregg Easterbrook, who from The New York Times believes that Diamond writes about books "Extraordinary in erudition and originality," but also "say exactly what they want to hear postmodern culture." Are we depleting the planet and everything will fall apart suddenly? "Not necessarily - consider Easterbrook. U.S. Deforestation, terrible in the nineteenth century, was reinvested in the twentieth century. And our current oil consumption, analysts observed a century ago, would be considered impossible. In short, Diamond, no big deal. " Even
specialists and Partha Dasgupta, professor of economics at Cambridge University and one of the most important figures in environmental economics (which has defended in most cases conservation positions) are in agreement with Diamond. Dasgupta considers brilliant analysis on the causes of the collapse of different societies throughout history, but harshly criticized his speculations on the future of human societies. Economist wields two reasons: the direct and simple extension to the future of past conditions, and not include benefits that cause environmental damage in the analysis. For example, Diamond, fertilizers are only sources of contamination, but does not include the enormous gains in food production that have resulted in our recent history. What alternatives would
then to not get caught in the prisoner's dilemma and that this is not, make it a tragedy for the common good? Los distinct specialists agreed that the cooperation with the other - although parezca ineficaz rationally, would be the only way for avoiding self-destructive spiral.
The Prisoner's Dilemma
An ominous paradox reason that leads to collective destruction
The tragedy of the commons, enunciated by Hardin, shows that what belongs to everyone, to no one and is likely to deteriorate completely
MANUEL PRIETO DIAZ
Police arrested two suspects of a crime, isolates, and suggests everyone the same treatment: "If you confess and your accomplice chooses not to speak, he would fall 10 years in prison and you go free. But if he confesses and you decide not to, the conviction will be for you and freedom for him. Even if the two decide not letting go, we will let you go after a brief arrest. And, if both confess, both be condemned to six years. "The Prisoner's Dilemma is a fascinating and sinister paradox well known and studied game theory in which the prisoners tend to confess and that whatever the choice of another, the punishment always confessing is reduced. Unfortunately for them, both choose to betray and two receive long sentences. A result known as suboptimal.
This dilemma shows that although from the perspective of the group it would be best to cooperate, rational egoism leads them to do so. behavior of which there are many examples in the present and serves to illustrate the tragedy of the commons, a concept created by biologist Garrett Hardin in 1968 and could summarized in the phrase so internalized in our values: what belongs to everyone, to no one, why not throw the paper on the floor if that comes back will do the same?
Hardin explained it to families of farmers who own animals share a common grazing. So when you consider adding one more animal to his herd They weigh the benefits of doing it themselves (+ 1) and on the other hand, the damage that overgrazing will for the community and for oneself. But in this case the consequences are shared by all, the negative utility for each farmer to take this decision is only a fraction of -1. Therefore, according to Hardin, Always Faithful decanting just by adding more animals and thereby ruining all the grass.
Since Hardin Sciencie article published in The tragedy of the common, the situation has shown signs of improvement and the ordinary - the water, fish stocks, forests, shoreline or street furniture continued supporting unsustainable pressure. In this context it is very enlightening to final essay by Jared Diamond, Collapse, where he talks about how societies choose to fail or succeed. The geographer quotes tragedy of the commons and the prisoner's dilemma to show how in the past various human societies, according to decisions taken in times of crisis, have been preserved or have followed the path of extinction. The parallels to this are disturbing. Diamond presents cases catastrophic Easter Island, Norse Greenland and the Maya culture, and compares them with the civilization of Pitcairn and Henderson Islands, the Inuit of Greenland and Iceland. Why the first
expired, and the second managed to survive? According to Diamond - who won the Pulitzer Prize with his first essay on the causes of the wealth of developed countries, Guns, Germs and Steel ", there are five factors that influence
the possible extinction of a company's attack enemies, loss of support of friendly societies, climate change, the social, political or religious because of these changes and human impact on the environment. Only one of these factors is capable of causing a catastrophe, but there is no doubt that the combination of two or more constitutes an imminent danger to any society.
The well-known example of Easter, isolated from the rest of the world, with food resources and aquifers very meager and, in particular, dominated by a divided society that puts the competition to build ever-larger statues, it seems a metaphor for our planet. Because of the various factors that led to its decline, the irresponsible action stands environmental human.
In its effort to erect monoliths more impressive than those of their neighbors, their inhabitants do not hesitate to completely wipe out the trees on the island, especially with a giant plant variety which depended
stability of its ecosystem. And Diamond concludes that, like the ancient inhabitants of Easter Island, we could not escape the Earth in case of such a disaster. "If I caught that fish or let my sheep eat the grass - Diamond writes," another fisherman or herder will anyway, so that makes no sense to refrain from abusing me fishing or grazing " . The correct rational behavior is to exploit then the action before the next consumer can do, even if the end result may be the destruction of the ordinary and therefore the damage to all consumers. In fact, although this logic has led many community resources are over exploited in excess to be eliminated, others have survived after having been exploited for hundreds or even thousands of years. Exaggerate "Diamond in the diagnosis? From the field of environmental protection is no shortage every day voices that give the reason or have a more troubling scenario: "This planet is home to 20 to 100 million different plants - Joaquín Araújo says the naturalist, author of Echoes ... logic, to understand the ecology-, 25% of this vast wealth is in danger. Each day, for decades, from one to 140 species may be fired for always avoidable expelled by human activities. A rate to be compared with the average extinction per year has been the rule that there is life on the planet. Consumption is exacerbated at the base of the problem: at the current rate, the collapse is literally guaranteed half a century before.
The glass half full But there are voices critical of the geographer prestige to put emphasis on the bottle as half empty. One is Gregg Easterbrook, who from The New York Times believes that Diamond writes about books "Extraordinary in erudition and originality," but also "say exactly what they want to hear postmodern culture." Are we depleting the planet and everything will fall apart suddenly? "Not necessarily - consider Easterbrook. U.S. Deforestation, terrible in the nineteenth century, was reinvested in the twentieth century. And our current oil consumption, analysts observed a century ago, would be considered impossible. In short, Diamond, no big deal. " Even
specialists and Partha Dasgupta, professor of economics at Cambridge University and one of the most important figures in environmental economics (which has defended in most cases conservation positions) are in agreement with Diamond. Dasgupta considers brilliant analysis on the causes of the collapse of different societies throughout history, but harshly criticized his speculations on the future of human societies. Economist wields two reasons: the direct and simple extension to the future of past conditions, and not include benefits that cause environmental damage in the analysis. For example, Diamond, fertilizers are only sources of contamination, but does not include the enormous gains in food production that have resulted in our recent history. What alternatives would
then to not get caught in the prisoner's dilemma and that this is not, make it a tragedy for the common good? Los distinct specialists agreed that the cooperation with the other - although parezca ineficaz rationally, would be the only way for avoiding self-destructive spiral.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)