@jkerian you can always study Japanese while riding public transports :P

@Dave The ever mysterious Dave arises from his slumber

Yeah... I actually miss that about the last (much smaller) town I lived in. Small place (~25,000 people), but the only half-decent public transit I've seen in the US.

hey all :) Who was asking about infinities? Because I just found a video that explains it better than the other one I shared

@Flaw was! I think

@silvermaple. Yup it was me

youtube.com/watch?v=elvOZm0d4H0&feature=related He explained it so I can understand it...

I got confused after he drew diagonals

Oh, that's not the interesting part

Then I got confused at the "If it's 2, we turn it into 1. And if it's not-2, we turn it into 2"

When the guy asks the question at the end, that's when it clicked for me

Oh which means that for the fractions example, if you switched the numbers around, you would find that you've already had it contained in your list

But for the decimals, you will always create a new number

Yeah!

So it's a "bigger infinity"

It's infinity infinities

I kinda laughed a little when he said

"It's a big topic"

Hah, yeah

MOAR INFINITIES!

I was looking into infinities also because I have a friend who is going to study math and statistics.

And he was musing about if you had infinite amount of money, and you played a coin-toss gamble with reward = 2x bet. You should always double your bet every round.

If you won?

Regardless of winning/losing

...why would you double your bet?

why would you gamble if you had infinite money?

that doubling your bet every round would be the most rational decision because it covers for the potential loss, and it would tend to break even

@silvermaple that was what I told him hahaha

money has no value if there is an infinite amount of it...

@Flaw haha

There's no point in trying to make more money than infinite money hahaha

right?!

I guess maybe there really is no such thing as "enough money"

maybe for some people @.@

for everyone

Money is just a way of counting wealth... you can always do more with more wealth

Granted... if you're lazy or selfish... you can probably have enough wealth

mmm, beg to differ...they've done studies where, once you have enough money to not have to worry about money, any more does not make you any happier

assuming your goal in life is to be happy

@silvermaple whose is?

or, not your goal...that makes it sound like you're not happy until the end

Hardly anyone's... humans are far more ambitious than that

assuming that for you, the point in life is to be happy

(this is a good thing... human civilization wouldn't survive if people stopped caring after their own happiness quota was reached)

@jkerian whose is what?

whose goal is just to be happy

Also, you're misconstruing the results of that study. Basically... diminishing returns kick in pretty hard after a particular 'standard of living' level, but that's a much weaker statement than "does not make you any happier".

Mmm? how?

Increasing with a decreasing rate does not equal to negative values

Oh, okay I'll give you semantics

(I also had some issues with the way they measured 'happiness')

@silvermaple unlike earlier today... this is NOT semantics, either A or B can be true

No...What I mean is that I'll admit I over-simplified what I said

ahh

I just realised I can switch "infinity" out for "happiness" for some parts and it would still make sense.

Some happiness are happier than other happinesses.

I just said that in my head!

And some are listable, and some unlistable.

I do think the concept of "enough money" must come from people who are too stupid to know what money can do, or too lazy that they can't imagine finding uses for it.

"Wait, what...oh, infinity is happiness? Oh, so some happieness are happier than other happinesses! Ah! He typed it!"

But then again, the phrase was popularized by our current US president... and I was tempted to ask him in a town hall a few miles from here "Mr President, when do you intend to admit that 'looting Scrooge McDuck's moneybin' is not a fiscal plan?"

@jkerian. I think that concept is because of what I call the "contentment model" of "success"

Some successes are also more successful than other successes

Some Flaws are more Flawed than other Flaws... >_>

Well, I think it's very simplified to say you can have enough money...I think you can get to the point where your income is such that you can life comfortably, you don't have to worry about money

For some reason this seems to be drifting towards an Orwellian topic

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others"

@jkerian, I think I subscribe to your "laziness" model hahaha

Yes there might be something that happens that puts a strain on your bank account, and there might be some Things that you want but can't afford

Don't get me wrong: If I won the lottery (and my odds are even slimmer than usual because I never buy lottery tickets) I'd buy lots of Things, and it would be awesome

@silvermaple I actually can't think of a single thing I'd buy

@jkerian. Buy more money.

Omg, all the video games

a pool

a motorcycle

I'd buy a pool table. I've always wanted a pool table.

Oh, yeah, one of those

Yeah... there would be investments and such... and travel. But I can't think of any actual things that I would buy.

But it wouldn't fit anywhere in my house

Plane tickets to everywhere

I'm biased though... I hate owning things

I only hate owning things as much as I hate losing them.

I believe the concept is called 物の哀れ

There are plenty of things I would do with a large sum of money if I had it, but shopping is not on the list

The bittersweet feeling of the passing of impermanent things.

Oh, I'm bad at that. I like keeping things

Me too haha. I can't bear to throw stuff away.

I just had my wisdom teeth out a week ago...and they're right here in a cup beside me

I need to get a little box to put them in

I threw my wisdom tooth away. It was shattered to pieces anyway.

They're sharp because they never came out of my head and chewed anything

One interesting difference between the very wealthy (in terms of business) and the instant wealth of a lottery winner. A rich businessman's time is extraordinarily valuable. If a particular activity is not pleasurable, and doesn't make $X per hour, it's better to hire someone else to do it. By contrast, a lottery winner''s time is relatively worthless. Just a random thought...

mmm, many lottery winners end up finding themselves in the same financial situation they were in prior to winning the lottery

The upper class has the mindset of "I don't have to do anything because I'm wealthy". For example, they were born wealthy, went to the best schools, nothing they really do is going to loose enough money to be broke, because they have tonnes and tonnes of money, so why bother

@silvermaple I haven't heard the numbers for anywhere else... but at least in the US, there's a rather astonishing amount of movement between the wealth quartiles.

The middle class has the mindset of "I work hard, I gain money, I better my situation". It doesn't matter where they started, they work to change their situation to suit them, as opposed to letting the system dictate to them what they will or will not do

@jkerian I don't understand

I see it as a continuum, and there are more at the bottom than the top. But the people below have the ability to see problems and fix them, but do not have the authority. The people who start at the top, don't have the ability to see the problems and fix them, but they have the authority to. Of course this is just my perspective that isn't backed by anything.

The only solution is for a person at the bottom to climb up without forgetting the problem, and the time it takes to climb must be short enough so that the problem hasn't changed much.

Something like three-quarters of the people in the wealthiest 25%, were born lower on the spectrum.

@jkerian oooh

@Flaw That makes a certain sense

@silvermaple Which means... yes... alot of people born at that level dropped a rank or so

(Which intuitively makes sense... children of the wealthy often work in "good paying" jobs... but not things that will keep them at that level)

And because of my perspective, I've grown very cynical of society and people. I believe that the system prevents itself from correction.

@Flaw I'd point out that if being low on the totem pole were sufficient for understanding problems, the whole world would recognize the wisdom of college sophomores.

I don't know where I heard this, but somewhere there was a hospital, and they decided to do something about patients getting sick from the hospital (not from what they were already there for, but for something they got when staying there). What the did was they asked their nurses for suggestions, then in a surprising twist of events, actually implemented their suggestions. Rate of patients getting sick at the hospital dropped to 0%

@jkerian I speak from only my limited viewpoint. Because I've experienced that workers on the bottom end actually know what's happening and going on.

@jkerian I just assumed he meant smart people

@silvermaple It depends on who you have working for you though. Nursing has the advantage of being an educated profession... and sickness transfer is almost entirely a matter of cleanliness/seperation.

@jkerian That's exactly my point. A lot of their suggestions where "there should be a hand sanitizer here" "we need to keep dirty sheets from the clean ones". They were simple, and the nurses who worked there every day could see it

So meanwhile, the people at the bottom are scrambling to fix the problem in their limited capacity wishing that the people up top would grant them authority to overcome some obstacles. But the people up top don't see the problem because it's never reported to them.

@Flaw This is seeming remarkably specific.

And then there are the heroes which try to jump over the levels of hierarchy in an attempt to fix the problem.

@Flaw Hmm... I'd say that scenario exists. But it's only the norm in sclerotic cultures.

I see it at IBM, for example. But it doesn't really apply either to politics or my company.

I'd have to concede that it's rather specific, considering my limited work experience and exposure.

(We rent a building that is a part of a large IBM complex... so we're pretty in-tune with their corporate culture)

I'm in a bad spot now. I don't have enough "bid points" for my course. (We have to bid for the modules we want to take like an auction).

I can't compete with the people going all-in.

That's too bad

I wish you luck

Anyway, it's past midnight for me, and I should get some sleep

Good night :)

Good night =)

I decided to take something else altogether.

introduction to ancient greek hydrology?

Introduction to Japanese Studies

I wanted to do "Space, Time and the Universe".

Any idea what ItJS is going to be?

None at all. It's not language though.

I went to read the short description given: The first component is humanities, covering art, philosophy, history and literature. The second component is social sciences, which includes sociology,anthropology, politics and economics. The third component is linguistics and language development.

That third part will be a bit boring for you, but otherwise those can be pretty interesting classes.

Hello. :)

'morning

Hi

元気ですか？

ちょっと眠い

元気です

"_\

:)

Anybody here?

aye

I've seen it be used twice, but not as in your sentence. There are a few questions relating to difference between は/が, you may want to look those up.

Well, apparently が is used when ONLY and ONLY it applies to that person..

So I guess the correct structure would be エリンは日本語がいいですね。

I don't know, this still sound strange to me, but I may be wrong. I think you want to say 上手 instead of いい. Otherwise it seems fine that way.

omg.. that's right

..and it doesn't mean that エリン is the only one good at Japanese. :)

Or wait..

That she is only good at.. or whatever you seemed to suggest. :O

What I'm trying to say is, it's saying that she's good at Japanese. No further implications.

Well, if I am saying that the topic is erin then I say she is good at Japanese, it only applies to her.

Yes since you're speaking of her.

I wasn't sure what you meant about the ONLY and ONLY part, you seemed to suggest that this had further implications on what she may be good at, or who else may be good at Japanese.. No such implications. Just plain statement that she's good at Japanese.

Ok, sorry. :P

What material are you learning from?

Self study

"Bookless"?

^

The internet method

I did do 3 years of study at school, but not anymore

Hey @Dave

lo

@gibbon With a stative predicate, that's the usual implication of が (exclusivity)

@jkerian not sure if I understand what you're saying now.

Too much to read right now :) Look at the sentence Shazer2 had.

This is one of those irritating things where "it depends which reference frame you put it in"

XがYが上手ですね。 means X and only X (in the current conversation) is good at Y.

No arguments there :)

XはYが上手ですね。 could be contrastive, or just generic topicality

morning all :)

'morning silvermaple

I guess it's closer to afternoon, but if anyone wants to watch a good tv show, watch BBC's Sherlock! It's so great!

Oh, hey...I watched the third episode and I didn't even realize...although I think maybe I should have

@Shazer2 It depends on the context. が does not always receive the "exhaustive description" interpretation.

"Isn't it too late to be awake now?" - I can't find how to say something like this in neither my basic grammar nor intermediate grammar dictionary.. (And I don't have an advanced one.. but is it an advanced sentence?)

My best guess from what I found: 起きているにしては遅すぎるんだね

How far off am I?

Seems like great books though.. A dictionary for basic/intermediate/advanced Japanese grammar. And a dictionary of Japanese particles.

@gibbon That sounds okay to me (as a non-native speaker)

I might say something like "この時間で、起きているのは大丈夫なの？"

時間に？

or adjust it according to politeness levels

Yeah that sound good too. Maybe in some cases though you won't have anything to put things into perspective like with この時間で. (maybe)

I just know I've tried saying similar things before but failed.

Yeah, that happens a lot

to me, anyway

It's a good way to learn though, I've found

Yeah. As long as you bother to look it up. :)

@silvermaple Would いま、寝ているべきじゃない work?

Wouldn't that be "shouldn't you sleep now?"

Sort of having the same intention of "too late to be awake" I think.

speaking of which, it's 3am here haha

Yeah, sure. I'm having a hard time expressing exactly what it is in that particular sentence I'm interested in. :) A circumstance in which you do something, perhaps.

@gibbon I think if that sentence works, it would literally mean to be late for being awake.

= I am awake, but I should have done that action at a previously decided time, but I missed that time, so I'm awake now and it's late.

..which may or may not be what I'm trying to say. :o

I need to read up on にしては

Similar I think: It's too warm for running.

@Flaw Well... if "by context" you mean "the predicate". Stative non-transitive verbs are almost always interpreted exclusively.

@Flaw As in: "It's too late for apologizes"? I wonder how close you are, that's interesting