The odds of winning the Superfecta are certainly not 116,000:1. If that were the actual odds anyone would be insane to place such a bet when the payout is only $542. Those odds would be true ONLY if it were equally likely for every hose to finish in any given position. Clearly that is not true, or this AI would not have 'picked' a winner, it would just have gotten lucky with a RNG.
I don't know what the Superfecta pool was, but it was probably at least a half a million, so there are probably around 1000 other winners just for this race.
This program picked ONE horse race winner (so far). A whole lot of people can pick ONE winner (especially when picking favorites, which is what this did), but it is rare to be able to CONSISTENTLY do that, which is why most people lose.
like those stock scams. email a bunch of people, tell half of them stock X is going to rise, tell half of them it's going to fall. Drop the guys who got the wrong prediction; take the half who got the correct prediction, and repeat the process. After N iterations, you will have (1/2)^N of your original population convinced that you can forecast the stock market correctly 100% of the time.
They are claiming that it got eroded, and that it wouldn't have if the sea level were a tiny bit lower. There is no way they can know that, especially since the actual sea level rise-to-date which is possibly attributable to AGW is more like 2 cm, not 25 cm.
This is a separate effect from your silly claim of a lie.
The statement in the summary, at least, is a lie because they are asserting a definitive cause-and-effect relationship where there is - at best - an unprovable possibility of one, rather than actual solid evidence for one. The claim is being sensationalized.
What they are doing is comparing two different environments in the ocean, in one of which the erosion is faster than the other even though sea level rise is the same for both, and trying to characterize what is making the difference in order that we can apply some reasoned predictability to any future sea rises from any cause, for instance from AGW.
This is pretty clear even just from the abstract, which ends with "Rates of
shoreline recession are substantially higher in areas exposed to high wave energy, indicating a
synergistic interaction between sea-level rise and waves. Understanding these local factors that
increase the susceptibility of islands to coastal erosion is critical to guide adaptation responses for these
remote Pacific communities."
Hmmm... bachelors in engineering. No experience in the automotive field, 2 months experience as a RA studying the environment. Then he started working for INNAS BV as an intern and got first authorship on this paper.
How about Peter A.J. Achten (second author)?
Zero other publications listed, but his contact in ScienceDirect is the address of... INNAS BV.
Interesting, looks like they developed the Chiron (R) Free Piston Engine, a two stroke engine that is supposedly "not dirty."
Convenient of them to put their product, and the paper of the two people that published this... thing... right there on the same page next to each other so we can all see the real motivation of it.
Sadly, this paper will get batted around the internet and become more and more exaggerated by anyone with an anti-electric agenda like that idiot hit piece comparing a Prius to a Hummer. Yes, that thing is still quoted everywhere and always.
Address all complaints to vrjhtimmers@gmail.com... that guy's going to have to change email addresses shortly if this crap paper hits the fan like it probably will.
Ugh.
Sam
A free piston engine? Great! gimme a few. or do they get you on shipping and handling?
And...... I presume the average driver changes the oil in the internal combustion engine once in a while. The used crankcase oil isn't exactly suitable for frying chicken in. AFAIK you don't have to do that to an electric motor. One more score for the electric. Not sure what goes on re transmission lube, needs replacing or what.
1) Not all energy comes from burning fossil fuels. Nuclear, Wind, Solar and Hydro could also be used to power an electric car. That alone should make it comparatively cleaner.
2) As for efficiency goes, in a car about only 15% of the fuel energy is converted into motion. The rest is wasted as heat. Power plants are more efficient at using that heat and turn it into electricity, making again electric cars get more efficiency per unit of fuel burned.
3) Gasoline must be carried to gas stations. Think of it as a hidden energy cost: The cost of running you car = the fuel it burns + the energy it took to get it to your car.
On the opposite side, batteries are not as efficient storing energy as gasoline is, and there is also loss of power on transmission lines. I haven't done the math myself, but overall electric should be more efficient than gasoline cars.
Some day aliens will land on earth and looking over our transportation systems, will ask us: what's the deal with all the portable space heating units?
We are not supposed to use electric heating because it is inefficient, how are cars supposed to be any different? What does it matter if the fuel is burned in a car or a power plant. If it reduces the weight of the car, how it is not more efficient to burn it on site?
How is electric heating inefficient? Except for insignificant losses as visible light, noise etc, all the energy becomes heat. come to think of it, the light and noise eventually become heat as well.
You probably live among cars smell, so you probably filter it out. I remember coming from the nearby mountains and getting out of the car in the city, appalling.
Anyway as you say smell is subjective.
Let us talk about the volume of vaporized stuff, this study says basically that modern cars let out less fuel fumes in 50000 km than the volume differential between new and used braking pads and tires.
I say somebody has misplaced a decimal point somewhere or is still using the fuel consumption data of volkswagen.
the usual talking point is that current vehicles emit fewer emissions driving full blast than pre-emissions control cars did just sitting there, from evaporation in tanks vented to the atmosphere.
haven't measured it myself
What's a reasonable time? It takes only a few seconds after arriving home to plug in an electric car. Is a few seconds reasonable?
For longer journeys, there are fast DC chargers which will charge Teslas or other brands to 80% charge in about 30 minutes. Unfortunately, there are 3 incompatible standards for the DC chargers.
come to think of it, there are three grades of gas at the gas station too, not to mention diesel.
hydrogen is miserable to handle. it's corrosive to metal, it doesn't liquefy nicely (volume for volume, there is more hydrogen in gasoline than in liquid hydrogen), and when it burns the flame is hard to see in daylight.
the only advantage of hydrogen is that it could bridge the gap; used as fuel for heat engine vehicles, or in fuel cells for electric vehicles.
Wave action is what erodes and ultimately destroys islands, and any increase in the water level is going to have an effect on wave action.
That being said, from looking at the pictures in the PDF report it kind of looks like this can be explained by extreme weather events, like a cyclone. One of the islands has completely moved since the 1940s. As in, its current boundaries and its boundaries in the 1940s do not overlap at all. That sounds like "regular" erosion of island land brought on by extreme weather events. Whether those events are related to global warming would be another issue.
that was the point of the paper. "Discussion
At least eleven islands across the northern Solomon
Islands have either totally disappeared over recent
decades or are currently experiencing severe erosion.
However, islands in the more sheltered Roviana area
of the southern Solomon Islands did not experience
significant coastal recession." http://iopscience.iop.org/arti...
Or you'd see that their point was to study erosion of the islands in relation to past ocean rise OF WHATEVER CAUSE to be able to predict effects of ocean rise due to FUTURE climate change.
oh slashdot, you make me cry..
The woman's name is Gladys Pugh and she is from Wales.
Ah, now we can cyberstalk her.
Gladys Pugh Chief Yellowcoat/Sports Organiser/Radio Maplin Announcer – Gladys was born in 1933 in Pontypridd, and spent her youth in the Rhondda Valley. She joined Maplins holiday camp in 1955 and rose through the ranks to become sports organiser and later chief Yellowcoat. She won the competition for the most popular girl Yellowcoat every year since she joined, until 1959, when she was beaten by Sylvia Garnsy. Upon Jeffrey Fairbrother's arrival at the camp at the start of the 1959 season, she fell passionately in love with him, although he did not reciprocate this. On one occasion, she found herself in a situation where Jeffrey had become drunk unintentionally, and she helped him back to his chalet. The following morning he awoke naked with no memory of the previous night, and found Gladys' bra in his bed. It was left ambiguous as to what actually happened. Gladys disliked all of the other female Yellowcoats, in particular Sylvia Garnsy, whom she saw as competition in her fight for Jeffrey's affections. Like Jeffrey, she also disapproved of Ted's schemes to scam the campers, even though she secretly had her own scheme selling reconditioned tennis balls. In the 1960 season, Spike Dixon fell in love with her, although she never knew this and it never amounted to anything. Gladys was left heartbroken when Jeffrey departed for Wisconsin without telling anyone at the end of the season, but she quickly recovered upon meeting Squadron Leader Clive Dempster, who arrived to take over Fairbrother's job. She immediately became attracted to Clive, and the two had an on-off relationship throughout the 1960 season. She eventually married Clive and moved to Australia with him at the end of the season.
I've been finding myself wondering about this lately when it comes to a number of people I know.
Seriously, we need some way to send these people back to 5th grade. It's astonishing. Maybe 3rd grade. Force them to take classes until they at least graduate the 8th grade. Keep them out of society as long as it takes for them to grasp 8th grade-level reading, writing, and maths. I really don't think it's too much to ask.
The only problem my proposal has is that I keep coming back around to who, exactly, should be in charge of determining when they've completed an 8th grade education....
Can we bring back poll tests? I don't care if in practice that's "racist." It probably will be in effect "racist." We need to solve the root issue here. The moment we decided "racism!" was an adequate answer, we failed the entire basis of our society. Tell me why people with darker skin color might have a problem passing a short exam before voting. That will give us a good idea of what we really need to fix.
Something must be done. I do not want to live in a world where solving a simple system of equations or engaging in very basic linear algebra to find an answer constitutes genius. Yet here we are. It's 2016, and I can't even.
While this story might seem funny at first, it quickly becomes sad. Also very inconvenient for a few hundred people who sit on the plane and get delayed beacuse of an idiot. Lots of people would say better safe than sorry, but this is much more than that: usually ignorance won't hurt many people, but it can reach a point where it will make the lives of the rest of the population a living hell.
As a sidenote, such stories made me to really think about what I want to read on to/from-US planes, for many years now. Back in the days I mostly read technical stuff, papers, articles, but slowly I switched to "simple" novels with no math and no images. Might be crazy, but I just don't want to be the cause of some idiot delaying the flight - which, as we can see, happens from time to time.
Actually it's sad right from the start, and a lot frightening.
Except the BBC picture is of electromagnetism, which is far less of a black art than economics.
Coming soon to a theater near you: They defeated Magneto, but now they face their greatest foe ever? Find out the answer when the X-Men take on Economo in this summer's smash blockbuster.
What Trump is saying is the law, the Liberals are the ones who change it to hate.
"going to build a wall on the border" News flash, that is already a law
"Asking immigrants their religion" News flash, that is already the law
All Trump is saying is that he is going to enforce the law, and that is a message people like to hear after 8 years of Obama ignoring the law.
I say no to hate, that is why I vote against Democrats. Democrats hate Americans more then anyone. But Democrat voters seem fine with being hated.
Yes "Obama isn't enforcing the immigration laws" we've all heard it. This might be a good place to point out that the Obama administration has deported 2.4 million illegal immigrants as of 2013, way more than any president in both terms; in fact, all previous administrations together from 1892 through 2007 only deported a total of 4.5 million. (https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_yb_2013_0.pdf page 103) In fact anybody who'd been paying some attention to news about immigration would have seen continuous attacks on him about the aggressive deportation policies since gthe beginning of his presidency. but do go on with what you were saying
I don't believe the air marshall could have justified shooting her.
They could have brought her back onto the flight and introduced her as the person who held their flight for 2 hours because she feared the guy sitting next to her doing math, and the marshall could have shot her, and everybody on the plane would have agreed to say she attacked him first.
She reported someone she thought was suspicious. Fuck her right?
But when the neighbors of the san benradino shooters didn't say anything it was all "why didn't they say anything".
The San Bernardino shooters weren't writing things on paper. You do know it's very hard to make paper explode with a pen, right?
When you report someone because they buy tons of sugar and potassium chlorate, you're doing the right thing.
When you report someone who buys a lot of firearms and talks about attacking the country, you're doing the right thing.
When you report someone for writing strange things on paper, you're both an idiot and a disgusting snitch.
Ha! Typical liberal. We have a constitutional right to buy a lot of firearms and talk about attacking the country! We don't have a constitutional right to do math!
Slashdot Mirror
summon mode? summon mode? wtf? like Roy Rogers whistling for Trigger?
The odds of winning the Superfecta are certainly not 116,000:1. If that were the actual odds anyone would be insane to place such a bet when the payout is only $542. Those odds would be true ONLY if it were equally likely for every hose to finish in any given position. Clearly that is not true, or this AI would not have 'picked' a winner, it would just have gotten lucky with a RNG.
I don't know what the Superfecta pool was, but it was probably at least a half a million, so there are probably around 1000 other winners just for this race.
This program picked ONE horse race winner (so far). A whole lot of people can pick ONE winner (especially when picking favorites, which is what this did), but it is rare to be able to CONSISTENTLY do that, which is why most people lose.
like those stock scams. email a bunch of people, tell half of them stock X is going to rise, tell half of them it's going to fall. Drop the guys who got the wrong prediction; take the half who got the correct prediction, and repeat the process. After N iterations, you will have (1/2)^N of your original population convinced that you can forecast the stock market correctly 100% of the time.
when it predicts trump gets the republican nomination.
They are claiming that it got eroded, and that it wouldn't have if the sea level were a tiny bit lower. There is no way they can know that, especially since the actual sea level rise-to-date which is possibly attributable to AGW is more like 2 cm, not 25 cm.
This is a separate effect from your silly claim of a lie.
The statement in the summary, at least, is a lie because they are asserting a definitive cause-and-effect relationship where there is - at best - an unprovable possibility of one, rather than actual solid evidence for one. The claim is being sensationalized.
What they are doing is comparing two different environments in the ocean, in one of which the erosion is faster than the other even though sea level rise is the same for both, and trying to characterize what is making the difference in order that we can apply some reasoned predictability to any future sea rises from any cause, for instance from AGW.
This is pretty clear even just from the abstract, which ends with "Rates of shoreline recession are substantially higher in areas exposed to high wave energy, indicating a synergistic interaction between sea-level rise and waves. Understanding these local factors that increase the susceptibility of islands to coastal erosion is critical to guide adaptation responses for these remote Pacific communities."
It's actually worse than that:
Victor R.J.H. Timmers: Listed as the first author. https://uk.linkedin.com/in/vic... [linkedin.com]
Hmmm... bachelors in engineering. No experience in the automotive field, 2 months experience as a RA studying the environment. Then he started working for INNAS BV as an intern and got first authorship on this paper.
How about Peter A.J. Achten (second author)? Zero other publications listed, but his contact in ScienceDirect is the address of... INNAS BV.
Let's see, what does INNAS BV do? http://www.innas.com/fallacies... [innas.com]
Interesting, looks like they developed the Chiron (R) Free Piston Engine, a two stroke engine that is supposedly "not dirty."
Convenient of them to put their product, and the paper of the two people that published this... thing... right there on the same page next to each other so we can all see the real motivation of it.
Sadly, this paper will get batted around the internet and become more and more exaggerated by anyone with an anti-electric agenda like that idiot hit piece comparing a Prius to a Hummer. Yes, that thing is still quoted everywhere and always.
Address all complaints to vrjhtimmers@gmail.com ... that guy's going to have to change email addresses shortly if this crap paper hits the fan like it probably will.
Ugh.
Sam
A free piston engine? Great! gimme a few. or do they get you on shipping and handling?
And...... I presume the average driver changes the oil in the internal combustion engine once in a while. The used crankcase oil isn't exactly suitable for frying chicken in. AFAIK you don't have to do that to an electric motor. One more score for the electric. Not sure what goes on re transmission lube, needs replacing or what.
1) Not all energy comes from burning fossil fuels. Nuclear, Wind, Solar and Hydro could also be used to power an electric car. That alone should make it comparatively cleaner. 2) As for efficiency goes, in a car about only 15% of the fuel energy is converted into motion. The rest is wasted as heat. Power plants are more efficient at using that heat and turn it into electricity, making again electric cars get more efficiency per unit of fuel burned. 3) Gasoline must be carried to gas stations. Think of it as a hidden energy cost: The cost of running you car = the fuel it burns + the energy it took to get it to your car. On the opposite side, batteries are not as efficient storing energy as gasoline is, and there is also loss of power on transmission lines. I haven't done the math myself, but overall electric should be more efficient than gasoline cars.
Some day aliens will land on earth and looking over our transportation systems, will ask us: what's the deal with all the portable space heating units?
We are not supposed to use electric heating because it is inefficient, how are cars supposed to be any different? What does it matter if the fuel is burned in a car or a power plant. If it reduces the weight of the car, how it is not more efficient to burn it on site?
How is electric heating inefficient? Except for insignificant losses as visible light, noise etc, all the energy becomes heat. come to think of it, the light and noise eventually become heat as well.
You probably live among cars smell, so you probably filter it out. I remember coming from the nearby mountains and getting out of the car in the city, appalling.
Anyway as you say smell is subjective.
Let us talk about the volume of vaporized stuff, this study says basically that modern cars let out less fuel fumes in 50000 km than the volume differential between new and used braking pads and tires.
I say somebody has misplaced a decimal point somewhere or is still using the fuel consumption data of volkswagen.
the usual talking point is that current vehicles emit fewer emissions driving full blast than pre-emissions control cars did just sitting there, from evaporation in tanks vented to the atmosphere.
haven't measured it myself
True - it is a non-falsifiable hypothesis, since every time another "point of no return" prediction fails, they reschedule it another 5-20 years out.
well, if you think about, whenever we reach a point of no return, we never do return.
What's a reasonable time? It takes only a few seconds after arriving home to plug in an electric car. Is a few seconds reasonable?
For longer journeys, there are fast DC chargers which will charge Teslas or other brands to 80% charge in about 30 minutes. Unfortunately, there are 3 incompatible standards for the DC chargers.
come to think of it, there are three grades of gas at the gas station too, not to mention diesel.
hydrogen is miserable to handle. it's corrosive to metal, it doesn't liquefy nicely (volume for volume, there is more hydrogen in gasoline than in liquid hydrogen), and when it burns the flame is hard to see in daylight. the only advantage of hydrogen is that it could bridge the gap; used as fuel for heat engine vehicles, or in fuel cells for electric vehicles.
this was not an exhaustive study.
Wave action is what erodes and ultimately destroys islands, and any increase in the water level is going to have an effect on wave action.
That being said, from looking at the pictures in the PDF report it kind of looks like this can be explained by extreme weather events, like a cyclone. One of the islands has completely moved since the 1940s. As in, its current boundaries and its boundaries in the 1940s do not overlap at all. That sounds like "regular" erosion of island land brought on by extreme weather events. Whether those events are related to global warming would be another issue.
that was the point of the paper.
"Discussion
At least eleven islands across the northern Solomon Islands have either totally disappeared over recent decades or are currently experiencing severe erosion. However, islands in the more sheltered Roviana area of the southern Solomon Islands did not experience significant coastal recession." http://iopscience.iop.org/arti...
Or you'd see that their point was to study erosion of the islands in relation to past ocean rise OF WHATEVER CAUSE to be able to predict effects of ocean rise due to FUTURE climate change. oh slashdot, you make me cry..
Can entropy ever be reversed?
that's why god gave us the ability to run videos backwards.
Gotta appreciate the irony of a Welsh complaining about incomprehensible scribbling...
"LOL! ROTFL!"
"Oh, you speak Welsh!"
The woman's name is Gladys Pugh and she is from Wales.
Ah, now we can cyberstalk her.
Gladys Pugh Chief Yellowcoat/Sports Organiser/Radio Maplin Announcer – Gladys was born in 1933 in Pontypridd, and spent her youth in the Rhondda Valley. She joined Maplins holiday camp in 1955 and rose through the ranks to become sports organiser and later chief Yellowcoat. She won the competition for the most popular girl Yellowcoat every year since she joined, until 1959, when she was beaten by Sylvia Garnsy. Upon Jeffrey Fairbrother's arrival at the camp at the start of the 1959 season, she fell passionately in love with him, although he did not reciprocate this. On one occasion, she found herself in a situation where Jeffrey had become drunk unintentionally, and she helped him back to his chalet. The following morning he awoke naked with no memory of the previous night, and found Gladys' bra in his bed. It was left ambiguous as to what actually happened. Gladys disliked all of the other female Yellowcoats, in particular Sylvia Garnsy, whom she saw as competition in her fight for Jeffrey's affections. Like Jeffrey, she also disapproved of Ted's schemes to scam the campers, even though she secretly had her own scheme selling reconditioned tennis balls. In the 1960 season, Spike Dixon fell in love with her, although she never knew this and it never amounted to anything. Gladys was left heartbroken when Jeffrey departed for Wisconsin without telling anyone at the end of the season, but she quickly recovered upon meeting Squadron Leader Clive Dempster, who arrived to take over Fairbrother's job. She immediately became attracted to Clive, and the two had an on-off relationship throughout the 1960 season. She eventually married Clive and moved to Australia with him at the end of the season.
What did she do, skip elementary school . . . ?
I've been finding myself wondering about this lately when it comes to a number of people I know.
Seriously, we need some way to send these people back to 5th grade. It's astonishing. Maybe 3rd grade. Force them to take classes until they at least graduate the 8th grade. Keep them out of society as long as it takes for them to grasp 8th grade-level reading, writing, and maths. I really don't think it's too much to ask.
The only problem my proposal has is that I keep coming back around to who, exactly, should be in charge of determining when they've completed an 8th grade education....
Can we bring back poll tests? I don't care if in practice that's "racist." It probably will be in effect "racist." We need to solve the root issue here. The moment we decided "racism!" was an adequate answer, we failed the entire basis of our society. Tell me why people with darker skin color might have a problem passing a short exam before voting. That will give us a good idea of what we really need to fix.
Something must be done. I do not want to live in a world where solving a simple system of equations or engaging in very basic linear algebra to find an answer constitutes genius. Yet here we are. It's 2016, and I can't even.
here, enjoy http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
Please look up the definition of paranoia in an authoritative dictionary
Paranoia: one who believes we are controlled by the authorities who control our dictionaries.
While this story might seem funny at first, it quickly becomes sad. Also very inconvenient for a few hundred people who sit on the plane and get delayed beacuse of an idiot. Lots of people would say better safe than sorry, but this is much more than that: usually ignorance won't hurt many people, but it can reach a point where it will make the lives of the rest of the population a living hell. As a sidenote, such stories made me to really think about what I want to read on to/from-US planes, for many years now. Back in the days I mostly read technical stuff, papers, articles, but slowly I switched to "simple" novels with no math and no images. Might be crazy, but I just don't want to be the cause of some idiot delaying the flight - which, as we can see, happens from time to time.
Actually it's sad right from the start, and a lot frightening.
Except the BBC picture is of electromagnetism, which is far less of a black art than economics.
Coming soon to a theater near you: They defeated Magneto, but now they face their greatest foe ever? Find out the answer when the X-Men take on Economo in this summer's smash blockbuster.
And Obama saying he visited 52 states!
What Trump is saying is the law, the Liberals are the ones who change it to hate.
"going to build a wall on the border" News flash, that is already a law "Asking immigrants their religion" News flash, that is already the law
All Trump is saying is that he is going to enforce the law, and that is a message people like to hear after 8 years of Obama ignoring the law.
I say no to hate, that is why I vote against Democrats. Democrats hate Americans more then anyone. But Democrat voters seem fine with being hated.
Yes "Obama isn't enforcing the immigration laws" we've all heard it. This might be a good place to point out that the Obama administration has deported 2.4 million illegal immigrants as of 2013, way more than any president in both terms; in fact, all previous administrations together from 1892 through 2007 only deported a total of 4.5 million. (https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_yb_2013_0.pdf page 103) In fact anybody who'd been paying some attention to news about immigration would have seen continuous attacks on him about the aggressive deportation policies since gthe beginning of his presidency.
but do go on with what you were saying
I don't believe the air marshall could have justified shooting her.
They could have brought her back onto the flight and introduced her as the person who held their flight for 2 hours because she feared the guy sitting next to her doing math, and the marshall could have shot her, and everybody on the plane would have agreed to say she attacked him first.
She reported someone she thought was suspicious. Fuck her right? But when the neighbors of the san benradino shooters didn't say anything it was all "why didn't they say anything".
The San Bernardino shooters weren't writing things on paper. You do know it's very hard to make paper explode with a pen, right?
When you report someone because they buy tons of sugar and potassium chlorate, you're doing the right thing.
When you report someone who buys a lot of firearms and talks about attacking the country, you're doing the right thing.
When you report someone for writing strange things on paper, you're both an idiot and a disgusting snitch.
Ha! Typical liberal. We have a constitutional right to buy a lot of firearms and talk about attacking the country! We don't have a constitutional right to do math!