mrglass8

This. I’m actually very curious how they bill you for this

*exacerbate.

exasperate means to irritate.

I've noticed many "False" ratings are based on a gross misinterpretation of real facts, while "Pants on Fire" ratings are completely fabricated.

Does that actually play a role in your ratings, or am I just imagining things.

Hi Professor Lessig.

I agree that the election system is broken, but I'm personally a staunch fiscal conservative.

Given the way you plan to pick your vice president, I am left incredibly apprehensive about your campaign. I want to reform the election system, but if I were to vote for you, I'd be stuck with Democratic VP (who wouldn't be elected but chosen at the DNC) who would become president once you resign.

Are you concerned that, in picking your VP to represent principles of the Democratic party, you are abandoning the votes of Republicans and Libertarians who want to see change in the system as well?

Also, what would be the first step in getting a Republican to run as a referendum candidate?

Yes, we'll probably always need invasive sensors because of the inverse problem. If I have a series of electrodes producing a specific field dispersed in space, I can calculate exactly what the electric field would be at any point through calculus.

On the other hand, if I tell you that the electric field at point (x,y) is 3, you pretty much have no clue where the field came from.

The way we get around this is by using lots of sensors to get a general approximation. However, as you get further away from and add more interference to the source, the approximation becomes weaker. Making matters worse, you have to interpret now an entire brain of information rather than a local area.

At least, that's my take with an undergrad background in this. There are people here much smarter than me, and I might be dead wrong.