Huh, of course math statistics can be racist. You can use them to prove anything even remotely true, and via p-hackin, a bunch that isn't You an statistically demonstrate that (hated minority) does worse in (objective measure of goodness) given sufficient (objective measures) to draw from.
Therefore, the defense of "an algorithm objectively determined X" shouldn't be considered a copout for possible racist decision making.
Except that fetching is happening more and more transparently to the user. And. according to the Supreme Court, in the US how a technology feels is more important than what it does.
The SSN wasn't important in this case. By definition, your bank has whatever information is required to open an account, and can thus duplicate it. Now, some form of digital signing could be used to fix those issues, but...
Apple simply paid what the Irish government told them to pay
But the Irish government wasn't allowed to lower their tax rate. And that makes the tax breaks invalid, so they never applied. It's like if an employee at McDonald's signs over all their assets to you. Unless it was a CEO with board approval, that arrangement is going to be declared invalid, because they didn't have permission to sell what they sold you. If you have a further problem, you get to take it up with the guy who "sold" you the assets, not claim McD's is screwing you over.
Are you really questioning whether the EU government would be able to confiscate Apple's assets? That's kinda a power governments have. They have to have over $14 B in liquid assets waiting to repatriot to the US in areas under EU control.
The most valuable resource is my time. I wouldn't use most languages for heavy number crunching (C, or well-written C++), but I wouldn't use C for something that needs to run every night and generate a report. Who cares if it takes 2 seconds as opposed to 1?
Heck, I remember when hand-optimizing the generated asm from a c compiler was a required profession. Of course, optimizing writing code is going to happen really freuently - those who can fix the problem have a strong incentive to do so.
Do you not realize, for some reason, that Slashdot is a social media site? And what, precisely, is it that you think makes google+, linkedin, facebook, twitter, or more or less most of the major social media sites..."childish?"
Well, on slashdot, every thing is pseudonymous (at least from me). It doesn't track any of my meatspace connections. There are no pictures. While my posts are the content is are being sold, (very Web 2.0), there's no real profile on me that can be crossapplied, beyond the ads on/.
And childish isn't the proper term. But it can certainly be stupid.
The reason we have such a glut of lawyers is automation hit lawyers hard in the late '90s. It used to be you needed tons of associates with law degrees poring over paper tomes, and write about how they impact some area. Now, a computer can print up all 1,142 cases (with synopses about how they apply to that area, cause it's cached from the one associate who did that work) in minutes.
This algorithm requires that case to already be assigned to a docket. This behavior happens now, but it's lawyer to applies to the investor group, and their lawyers who evaluate it.
It sounds like several lawyers already rejected your case. That is prima facia evidence to an algorithm it has no merit.
Keep in mind, this isn't "how worthy is this case" but "of my limited funds, where should I invest?"
This is nothing like Thiel's lawsuit. He wanted to hurt Gawker. This is about automating the existing field of bankrolling civil litigation for a cut of the settlement. It happens now, but has human beings estimating the payouts. I mean, the obvious example is attorneys who get 25%-33% of the settlement, but there are also investment groups that do this.
It tends to be a good thing, as they (wanting to make money) only back non-frivolous cases, and help the little guy stand up to the juggernauts. How else can one person sue a billion dollar firm?
Oh good. I thought this was an impossible problem of accessing a bunch of existing, disparate data and entering it into a system. Nothing as simple as a team of minimum wage drones could accomplish with a massive budget.
Instead, I find self-driving cars are limited only by natural language processing, and the ability to cross-reference natural language with what's happening in the physical world.
Because most universities are just a billion pokestops on top of each other, you'd think it would increase when people went back to school. Anecdotally it seems like a lot of people are picking it up more whne they get to campus.
And, being in school involvs a lot of waiting around, walking, etc.
He might very well have created Microsoft, then abandoned it when the maximum he could get from it was approaching $10 billion.
Microsoft was a public company. Even if Gates quit, someone would still have pushed it forward. And I doubt he would keep his $10 billion after the shareholder lawsuit if he said, "I got mine, shut it down." Heck, I would imagine that the purchase of shares would include golden handcuffs to prevent him stepping down at all.
Back to the point, that's one of the philosophies of capitalism: The more people work (economically, meaning an investment of labor, capital, or advice), the more they should make.
That is not one of the philosophies of capitalism I've ever heard of. Capitalism is the idea that private capital, invested for reward, is how the means of production should be allocated. It's completely disconnected from how much work pays. Also, investing capital is not work.
The OP brought up Trump. The OP said Gates was better than Trump because he didn't have Daddy's money. My response to that (that he in fact did) is what you're responding to.
Money is cheap now. But, yes, Steve Jobs and Woz didn't have millionaire parents. But my comment was in relation to Trump (who got a lot of start up capital/connections/cosigning from his dad.) I was just pointing out that Gates could get a lot of those same boosts.
Does anyone really think that if Bill Gates had been told he could never have been worth more than $10 billion, he would have somehow not created Microsoft?
. He didn't have daddy give him a few million to get started
No, just be on the board of IBM to help him get MS DOS on literally every machine. And his dad was worth millions, so getting some startup cash wasn't impossible.
The problem is that a person can claim their vote is hacked. Which means they can check if their vote was properly cast. Which means so can their boss/a mobster/abusive spouse/guy buying their vote.
That site says it avoids the issue, so obviously it's not possible to track their vote.
I thought El Nino and La Nina were about where the warm water rose to the surface (water is always going down and up. There's the gulf stream current of warm water, that comes up near NE or Greenland or Iceland. or something. So, during El Nino, where it comes up closer to Australia's east coast, and California. During La Nina it came up in parts of the ocean we don't care about.
Ummm... I've been hearing people claim it's an El Nino year for years now. Also, El Nino (and La Nina) are about moving heat around the globe, not making the whole earth hotter.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh, of course math statistics can be racist. You can use them to prove anything even remotely true, and via p-hackin, a bunch that isn't You an statistically demonstrate that (hated minority) does worse in (objective measure of goodness) given sufficient (objective measures) to draw from.
Therefore, the defense of "an algorithm objectively determined X" shouldn't be considered a copout for possible racist decision making.
Except that fetching is happening more and more transparently to the user. And. according to the Supreme Court, in the US how a technology feels is more important than what it does.
The SSN wasn't important in this case. By definition, your bank has whatever information is required to open an account, and can thus duplicate it. Now, some form of digital signing could be used to fix those issues, but...
But is trivially transformable into the information that is. See also, a zipped jpeg.
Now, I disagree with the ruling, but I also disagree with your logic.
But the Irish government wasn't allowed to lower their tax rate. And that makes the tax breaks invalid, so they never applied. It's like if an employee at McDonald's signs over all their assets to you. Unless it was a CEO with board approval, that arrangement is going to be declared invalid, because they didn't have permission to sell what they sold you. If you have a further problem, you get to take it up with the guy who "sold" you the assets, not claim McD's is screwing you over.
Are you really questioning whether the EU government would be able to confiscate Apple's assets? That's kinda a power governments have. They have to have over $14 B in liquid assets waiting to repatriot to the US in areas under EU control.
The most valuable resource is my time. I wouldn't use most languages for heavy number crunching (C, or well-written C++), but I wouldn't use C for something that needs to run every night and generate a report. Who cares if it takes 2 seconds as opposed to 1?
Heck, I remember when hand-optimizing the generated asm from a c compiler was a required profession. Of course, optimizing writing code is going to happen really freuently - those who can fix the problem have a strong incentive to do so.
Well, on slashdot, every thing is pseudonymous (at least from me). It doesn't track any of my meatspace connections. There are no pictures. While my posts are the content is are being sold, (very Web 2.0), there's no real profile on me that can be crossapplied, beyond the ads on /.
And childish isn't the proper term. But it can certainly be stupid.
The reason we have such a glut of lawyers is automation hit lawyers hard in the late '90s. It used to be you needed tons of associates with law degrees poring over paper tomes, and write about how they impact some area. Now, a computer can print up all 1,142 cases (with synopses about how they apply to that area, cause it's cached from the one associate who did that work) in minutes.
And yet, law schools are the same size.
This algorithm requires that case to already be assigned to a docket. This behavior happens now, but it's lawyer to applies to the investor group, and their lawyers who evaluate it.
It sounds like several lawyers already rejected your case. That is prima facia evidence to an algorithm it has no merit.
Keep in mind, this isn't "how worthy is this case" but "of my limited funds, where should I invest?"
This is nothing like Thiel's lawsuit. He wanted to hurt Gawker. This is about automating the existing field of bankrolling civil litigation for a cut of the settlement. It happens now, but has human beings estimating the payouts. I mean, the obvious example is attorneys who get 25%-33% of the settlement, but there are also investment groups that do this.
It tends to be a good thing, as they (wanting to make money) only back non-frivolous cases, and help the little guy stand up to the juggernauts. How else can one person sue a billion dollar firm?
Oh good. I thought this was an impossible problem of accessing a bunch of existing, disparate data and entering it into a system. Nothing as simple as a team of minimum wage drones could accomplish with a massive budget.
Instead, I find self-driving cars are limited only by natural language processing, and the ability to cross-reference natural language with what's happening in the physical world.
Because most universities are just a billion pokestops on top of each other, you'd think it would increase when people went back to school. Anecdotally it seems like a lot of people are picking it up more whne they get to campus.
And, being in school involvs a lot of waiting around, walking, etc.
Microsoft was a public company. Even if Gates quit, someone would still have pushed it forward. And I doubt he would keep his $10 billion after the shareholder lawsuit if he said, "I got mine, shut it down." Heck, I would imagine that the purchase of shares would include golden handcuffs to prevent him stepping down at all.
That is not one of the philosophies of capitalism I've ever heard of. Capitalism is the idea that private capital, invested for reward, is how the means of production should be allocated. It's completely disconnected from how much work pays. Also, investing capital is not work.
The OP brought up Trump. The OP said Gates was better than Trump because he didn't have Daddy's money. My response to that (that he in fact did) is what you're responding to.
Money is cheap now. But, yes, Steve Jobs and Woz didn't have millionaire parents. But my comment was in relation to Trump (who got a lot of start up capital/connections/cosigning from his dad.) I was just pointing out that Gates could get a lot of those same boosts.
A win for Android is a win for Google.
The play store (and the app store) make so much more money than the hardware its not even funny.
Does anyone really think that if Bill Gates had been told he could never have been worth more than $10 billion, he would have somehow not created Microsoft?
No, just be on the board of IBM to help him get MS DOS on literally every machine. And his dad was worth millions, so getting some startup cash wasn't impossible.
That said, he is giving away a lot of his cash.
The problem is that a person can claim their vote is hacked. Which means they can check if their vote was properly cast. Which means so can their boss/a mobster/abusive spouse/guy buying their vote.
That site says it avoids the issue, so obviously it's not possible to track their vote.
Except for the part where most (all?) studies that measure the effects of broken windows policing don't find any positive result.
Now, it gets repeated a lot. And it has a compelling (if, based on evidence, incorrect) rationalle. But that only "works" like Reaganomics.
I thought El Nino and La Nina were about where the warm water rose to the surface (water is always going down and up. There's the gulf stream current of warm water, that comes up near NE or Greenland or Iceland. or something. So, during El Nino, where it comes up closer to Australia's east coast, and California. During La Nina it came up in parts of the ocean we don't care about.
Uber drivers are desperate for cash. I don't begrudge the starving person who steals a loaf of bread. I begrudge the people cheering that person on.
Aren't there ones that detect if you're connected to a Stingray?
Ummm... I've been hearing people claim it's an El Nino year for years now. Also, El Nino (and La Nina) are about moving heat around the globe, not making the whole earth hotter.