• Coffee House
  • We apparently cannot discern latency below 80ms (p.3)
2012/12/03 20:12:36
The Maillard Reaction


I got carried away.

:-)
2012/12/03 20:13:33
bapu
mike_mccue


I got carried away.

:-)

Shhhhhhh,it happens.


No need to broadcast it.
2012/12/03 20:17:05
Crg
You might want to consider smaller fonts as it took me 162ms to read that one.

 
Wow! the one heal of stop watch you got there.
2012/12/03 20:19:42
Crg
mike_mccue



http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/





Interesting, I improved my time by nearly a 100 ms in four clicks.
2012/12/03 20:26:13
Ham N Egz
bapu


mike_mccue



http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/




McQ,


You might want to consider smaller fonts as it took me 162ms to read that one.


Freddie?? is dat ewe?
2012/12/03 20:39:59
Bub
I can't get below 390ms.
2012/12/03 20:43:56
Crg
214. If we didn't make it happen, we really don't know when it started. If we did make it happen we don't spend the time interpreting what it is first.
2012/12/03 21:17:01
bapu
Bub


I can't get below 390ms.

Some day you eat the bear and some days the bear eats you?


2012/12/03 21:19:30
SteveStrummerUK
I'm quite fond of the current theory that holds that there is no such thing as free will.

It has been proved that we react to situations faster than the information needed to allow us to make that particular decision can physically reach our brains from the relevant stimulus. And these situations are not those we normally associate with autonomic 'reflex' actions, such as (unconsciously) withdrawing one's hand from a flame, or breathing, or the beating of our hearts, but actions that we believe we are consciously thinking about and deciding to make.

That we appear to react automatically to such stimuli, but then our brain tricks us into believing that we actually performed the act because we thought about, and then decided to perform that act.
If this theory holds water, the ramifications are incredibly far reaching. Imagine a situation where you stand in the dock accused of a crime. The evidence against you may be water tight, but you could argue that science has proved beyond doubt that you cannot have consciously decided to commit the crime.
 
I love the idea that we all think we're in complete control of our lives, but in fact we are being 'driven' by a series of automatic responses, and that conscious thought is merely an elaborate illusion.
 
On an evolutionary basis, it makes a lot of sense really. Our genes are far too clever to allow genuine conscious thought to threaten their continued survival.
 
 
 
 
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account