because they were always fakers. They were never good people. Lip service to liberal values, and then installing fascist dictators in countries were were sworn to protect via treaty.
Yes, Russia different idea is that it thinks that America should overthrow 3 different governments under a single Peace-prize winning president.
First there was Libya: We overthrew the government.
Then we went after Syria: We tried really hard to overthrow the government but Russia stopped us. We didnt train enough rebels in the Libyan training camps we set up.
Then because Russia prevented Syria, Ukraine: We overthrew the democratically elected government of the Ukraine and installed racist fascists. It costs us only $5 billion. Cheapest one yet.
That pretty much sums of the difference between our two nations right there.
You Americans do understand that what your media reports is literally the opposite of what the rest of the worlds media reports, right?
The AI is only as smart as the data its fed. If the statistics are biased (as in, mathematically, not subjectively), then the AI will be as well.
Thats not how it works.
Machine learning will correct for those biases. Thats the point of machine learning. So long as the desired outputs are not biased all is good. If the desired outputs are biased, thats a different problem entirely.
If the desired output is how likely a person is to choose between Subway, Taco Bell, and Kentucky Friend Chicken, based on the actual choices of actual people, then no amount of input bias will thwart the learning. It doesnt matter if one of the inputs is someones opinion.. even the opinion of racist people. If the opinion are negatively correlated with the output because of a bias, machine learning will figure that out.
I like how you guys dont understand machine learning at all.
If an opinion is part of the input, it will still learn if that opinion has weight on the desired output.
Can we talk about the output now? or are you still going to ignorantly drool on the input?
If the desired output is, for instance, the chance that a parson will commit the crime again, then its going to be trained to output actual recidivism data, not someones opinion of it. The inputs are just clues of varying weights. The learning will not care if the input is negatively or positively correlated with the desired output. It will in fact determine if the input is negatively or positively correlated. Thats the point of machine learning.
How do you tell encrypted data from un-encrypted? It's just 1s and 0s.
The encrypted data is the stuff that follows perfect statistical randomness. Every other kind of data has an identifiable coherence. Data compression produces a just-slightly-not-perfect statistical randomness that can be detected by a model with an order higher than the order of the model used to compress the data.
Dude its right there in the summary. Equitable outcomes instead of equitable opportunity. A future where no matter how hard you try to fail, the A.I.s wont let you.
...and thus the government looks good defending the rights of the people while actually raping a business of its private data while making harmful allegations against it that are unprovable either way.
Congress is supposedly "working on" a new healthcare package. But really the work has already done by K Street insurance lobby. They wrote the bill, and handed it off to their lapdogs in congress to pass. The healthcare bill is one mamoth crony capitalist golden subsidy to the insurance companies.
Its not a big conspiracy. Its a lot of little competing ones. The politicians all agree that regulation is the way forward because regulation equals money, but they dont agree on which specific companies get the most benefit because each politician is getting money from difference sources, at different times. Whats not on the table is the good of the people.
This will be used as a method of gaining government approval to search the hard drives of businesses. Accuse them of breaking this law, then scour every drive on the pretense that they are looking at "browser history"
My employer definitely does the background check and it better match what you put down in the discloser. They do the full FBI-involved national background check not just the local police wrap sheet.
Its known thieves they are looking for. They also disqualify anyone that isnt truthful about what the background check will find.
So you are saying that the federal highway funds should also be spent on global warming research then, right? No point having highways if you destroy the world you build them on.
..or have you just decided that you dont mind that NASA is off mission in this case? Yeah... you are the problem.
Its real decline began when it became the cover for global warming research. Several billion dollars annually misappropriated away from anything to do with NASA's mission.
It was recently revealed that NASA was spending over $2 billion/year on global warming research.
Maybe they would have enough money by now if they werent spending it politically on things that other government agencies like the NOAA are already funded to study. James Hansen can go fuck himself.
And to end one of the bullshit arguments before it starts:
NASA stands for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Aeronautics is "the science or art involved with the study, design, and manufacturing of air flight capable machines, and the techniques of operating aircraft and rockets within the atmosphere."
A climate researcher is given control of NASA. Suddenly all his friends are splitting up literally billions per year on something the department isnt even supposed to be doing. Then they cry poverty for not having enough money to accomplish their mission.
First they lobbied for the DMCA.
Then they lobbied for "Net Neutrality"
This *should* be all anyone needs to know. That was AT&T consultants (and other providers with substantial dsl and/or cellular data) that wrote the first FCC Net Neutrality rules and they are fighting to keep it from changing, meanwhile Comcast, Cablevision, etc were also lobbying for their own version of Net Neutrality but they didnt get theirs.. so here they are lobbying to change the rules.
Notice how removal of the DMCA isnt even a part of the discussion. No matter what the rules end up being, the DMCA will be used to destroy the little-guy businesses. Thats a nice video streaming or other service you have there... it would be a shame if we were legally required to block all your data because an endless series of people claimed that you are violating their copyright.
This is a legislation war between the various kinda of internet providers, and there are a bunch of fucking rubes that so want the idealist "Net Neutrality" that they dont care that so far every "Net Neutrality" has been antithetical to what they want. The problem is the politicians. The solution isnt to give them more paper to regulate with.
Democrats dont think that the politicians are the problem because each and every one of them would be influenced by the money. The only "Democrat" that doesn't... the most popular "Democrat" in the country... is actually an Independent Socialist.
Maybe in the head of someone not quite as talented.
What is being looped over is not defined by that for statement. Only the limit of the loop is defined by that for statement. What is being looped over is defined by the block of code after the for specifically by how the loop index is used.
Slashdot Mirror
because they were always fakers. They were never good people. Lip service to liberal values, and then installing fascist dictators in countries were were sworn to protect via treaty.
Yes, Russia different idea is that it thinks that America should overthrow 3 different governments under a single Peace-prize winning president.
First there was Libya: We overthrew the government.
Then we went after Syria: We tried really hard to overthrow the government but Russia stopped us. We didnt train enough rebels in the Libyan training camps we set up.
Then because Russia prevented Syria, Ukraine: We overthrew the democratically elected government of the Ukraine and installed racist fascists. It costs us only $5 billion. Cheapest one yet.
That pretty much sums of the difference between our two nations right there.
You Americans do understand that what your media reports is literally the opposite of what the rest of the worlds media reports, right?
You carry a card around that can reach into your bank account?
Let that sink in for a bit. If you are going to use plastic, the only rational choice is credit cards.
The AI is only as smart as the data its fed. If the statistics are biased (as in, mathematically, not subjectively), then the AI will be as well.
Thats not how it works.
.. even the opinion of racist people. If the opinion are negatively correlated with the output because of a bias, machine learning will figure that out.
Machine learning will correct for those biases. Thats the point of machine learning. So long as the desired outputs are not biased all is good. If the desired outputs are biased, thats a different problem entirely.
If the desired output is how likely a person is to choose between Subway, Taco Bell, and Kentucky Friend Chicken, based on the actual choices of actual people, then no amount of input bias will thwart the learning. It doesnt matter if one of the inputs is someones opinion
Stop talking about shit you dont understand.
The logical conclusion to your argument is that you actually believe that SJW's know the difference between right and wrong.
They demonstrably do not.
Intel boards got significantly cheaper, matching amd's, only after Intel castrated the number of pcie lines available.
I like how you guys dont understand machine learning at all.
If an opinion is part of the input, it will still learn if that opinion has weight on the desired output.
Can we talk about the output now? or are you still going to ignorantly drool on the input?
If the desired output is, for instance, the chance that a parson will commit the crime again, then its going to be trained to output actual recidivism data, not someones opinion of it. The inputs are just clues of varying weights. The learning will not care if the input is negatively or positively correlated with the desired output. It will in fact determine if the input is negatively or positively correlated. Thats the point of machine learning.
it says "equitable outcomes" .. not "equitable opportunity" nor "equitable treatment"
Ben Affleck is that you?
How do you tell encrypted data from un-encrypted? It's just 1s and 0s.
The encrypted data is the stuff that follows perfect statistical randomness. Every other kind of data has an identifiable coherence. Data compression produces a just-slightly-not-perfect statistical randomness that can be detected by a model with an order higher than the order of the model used to compress the data.
Affordable Care Act that people can't afford.
Citizens United that unites.... corporations.
What is your definition??
The only definition that matters is the one written into law.
Thats clearly not important to some people... the idea itself is so good that it just doesnt matter what the law actually is.
Dude its right there in the summary. Equitable outcomes instead of equitable opportunity. A future where no matter how hard you try to fail, the A.I.s wont let you.
...and thus the government looks good defending the rights of the people while actually raping a business of its private data while making harmful allegations against it that are unprovable either way.
Congress is supposedly "working on" a new healthcare package. But really the work has already done by K Street insurance lobby. They wrote the bill, and handed it off to their lapdogs in congress to pass. The healthcare bill is one mamoth crony capitalist golden subsidy to the insurance companies.
Its not a big conspiracy. Its a lot of little competing ones. The politicians all agree that regulation is the way forward because regulation equals money, but they dont agree on which specific companies get the most benefit because each politician is getting money from difference sources, at different times. Whats not on the table is the good of the people.
This will be used as a method of gaining government approval to search the hard drives of businesses. Accuse them of breaking this law, then scour every drive on the pretense that they are looking at "browser history"
My employer definitely does the background check and it better match what you put down in the discloser. They do the full FBI-involved national background check not just the local police wrap sheet.
Its known thieves they are looking for. They also disqualify anyone that isnt truthful about what the background check will find.
That news doesnt get reported in the U.S.
The world is watching the U.S. but the U.S. is only government spying on the world.
So lets obliterate the moon, ban cooking, and only allow electricity in government buildings.
So the end game is North Korea?
So you are saying that the federal highway funds should also be spent on global warming research then, right? No point having highways if you destroy the world you build them on.
..or have you just decided that you dont mind that NASA is off mission in this case? Yeah... you are the problem.
Its real decline began when it became the cover for global warming research. Several billion dollars annually misappropriated away from anything to do with NASA's mission.
It was recently revealed that NASA was spending over $2 billion/year on global warming research.
Maybe they would have enough money by now if they werent spending it politically on things that other government agencies like the NOAA are already funded to study. James Hansen can go fuck himself.
And to end one of the bullshit arguments before it starts:
NASA stands for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Aeronautics is "the science or art involved with the study, design, and manufacturing of air flight capable machines, and the techniques of operating aircraft and rockets within the atmosphere."
A climate researcher is given control of NASA. Suddenly all his friends are splitting up literally billions per year on something the department isnt even supposed to be doing. Then they cry poverty for not having enough money to accomplish their mission.
First they lobbied for the DMCA.
Then they lobbied for "Net Neutrality"
This *should* be all anyone needs to know. That was AT&T consultants (and other providers with substantial dsl and/or cellular data) that wrote the first FCC Net Neutrality rules and they are fighting to keep it from changing, meanwhile Comcast, Cablevision, etc were also lobbying for their own version of Net Neutrality but they didnt get theirs.. so here they are lobbying to change the rules.
Notice how removal of the DMCA isnt even a part of the discussion. No matter what the rules end up being, the DMCA will be used to destroy the little-guy businesses. Thats a nice video streaming or other service you have there... it would be a shame if we were legally required to block all your data because an endless series of people claimed that you are violating their copyright.
This is a legislation war between the various kinda of internet providers, and there are a bunch of fucking rubes that so want the idealist "Net Neutrality" that they dont care that so far every "Net Neutrality" has been antithetical to what they want. The problem is the politicians. The solution isnt to give them more paper to regulate with.
Democrats dont think that the politicians are the problem because each and every one of them would be influenced by the money. The only "Democrat" that doesn't... the most popular "Democrat" in the country... is actually an Independent Socialist.
It's a little more than just "loop"
Maybe in the head of someone not quite as talented.
What is being looped over is not defined by that for statement. Only the limit of the loop is defined by that for statement. What is being looped over is defined by the block of code after the for specifically by how the loop index is used.
YOU are welcome.