The BBC did an analysis of variance on mean time between failures between the ANNOVA system, the previous software system, and doing it manually, and ANNOVA came in worst.
In other words, ANNOVA failed ANOVA.
(Yes, I am a father, but my son doesn't understand statistics, so I have to find another outlet for "Statistical Dad jokes.)
He did a bang up job implementing the Winklevii's idea a few years ago. Also, there's some dissatisfaction with how he's doing his current job, so he might be looking for a new project.
"It is important to understand that the FCC's proposed order is based on a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of Internet technology,"
This is very incorrect. The FCC understands that, without net neutrality, internet technology will lock in far more profits for Comcast and their allies. That's the only thing that they care about.
All their verbiage that people are decrying as incorrect is nothing more than FUD to justify a decision that has nothing to do with technology, or what's best for the majority of people, or anything else besides increasing and, more to the point, ensuring profits for the big guys for years to come.
True, but the link makes it significantly more convenient to find the material by using a single click rather than having to highlight the word, right click, and select "Search Google For...", or copy the material to a new browser window and search for it there.
Ask Amazon about how important being able to complete an action in one click is to the user experience and having people complete transactions.
I work with a lot of PhD's, and it appears that if you get one of those, you immediately know everything about everything.
I had a PhD, who had just come back from a 2-day "Scientist to Sea" underway, tell me that I really didn't understand how standing watch worked on a ship, despite my having spent eight years on sea duty in the Navy, but she would be glad to "PhD-splain" it to me.
Hate to tell you this, but there are right/wrong answers to all of the problems you cited. The only one that might have multiple answers, depending upon how you worded it, is how many people can you fit into your house.
My best guess is that most of the people don't like your ideas because they don't think your suggestions would improve the product, not any innate refusal to change.
Think about how many times one of your favorite apps has changed its interface in a way you thought sucked. Do you really think the designers said, "Hey, we've got a great interface, let's make it worse?" No, just like you, they thought their changes would improve it, but they didn't.
A favorite example was when Google removed the Pegman from Maps, making using Streetview almost impossible.
At the end of "Methuselah's Children," after the long-lived Howard Families return to Earth after escaping a lynching, they discover that Earth discovered the fresh blood rejuvenated people. Once they knew this, they had a crash research program to create fresh blood to allow everyone to live well into their hundreds.
if you can find it, the ACM SIGGRAPH's "Story of Computer Graphics" (http://www.siggraph.org/movie/) from 2000 credits 1982's "Tron" as being the first film with significant computer graphics. There is a lot of discussion from people who worked on the CGI about how they did it.
However, to a man, they all said that they walked out of the theater saying, "Meh." They realized that the effects can't make the movie, there has to be something more.
This is one of those completely idiotic "thought experiments" that philosophers are so fond of.
I've been driving for 46 years now (I started early, but am still old) and have probably driven well over half a million miles. I have NEVER had to make a decision, "Do I kill myself or swerve and kill ten innocents?"
Almost nearly everyone on/. drives, and I don't even begin to guess the number of miles driven by this audience: has anyone here ever had to make such a decision? Has anyone even heard of such a decision occurring in the real world? For fighter pilots maybe this is a real concern - the Great Santini and the recent Blue Angel who died (as well as others) supposedly stayed with their aircraft to minimize civilian casualties on the ground. But driving a car???
It's about as smart as worrying about what the AI does in the event of a Martian invasion.
It's got to be named "Hired Girl, Inc." Yes, it's slightly sexist, but with with all the anti-Islamist sentiment, "Aladdin Auto-Engineering" is definitely out.
So after the concert, everyone has to go back through the turnstiles to get their bags unlocked and returned to the promoter? What if someone says they left their phone in the car so they don't need a bag - are they searched? Do people need to surrender something like a license to get a bag? If not, what prevents them from either leaving with the bag or ripping it open during the show, making the process much more expensive for the performer/promoter? What about people who can't bear to be out of contact with their kids caregiver even for the length of a show? I would guess that the bag makes vibration less effective, and they are unlikely to ever hear ringing at a concert. (I wouldn't have an issue with it, but don't respond that they should put up with it since it was common in my day - people's expectations have changed.)
I can understand this more for comedians - a leak of their material is much more important, since the difference between hearing their material on a smartphone or live is pretty small, so long as the audio is good enough to understand. However, the difference between being at a concert and watching someone's cell phone video of a concert is so large that I can't imagine anyone saying, "No, I don't need to go see Alicia (or whomever) - the cell phone video was just as good as being there."
The biggest rip-off, er "homage", was in one of the most popular episodes of TOS, where tribbles were simply the martian flat cats from The Rolling Stones.
Slashdot Mirror
How the plan was conceived:
(Think of the old Guinness commercials, with two old time guys talking to each other):
Guinness guy #1: "Almost all the problems between planes and drones have been when drones are SEEN in the vicinity of aircraft or airports."
Guinness guy #2: "Correct."
#1: "Yes, and drones are much HARDER TO SEE at night."
#2: "Again, correct."
#1: "So we'll fly drones at night. The planes and airports won't be able to see them, so there will NO LONGER be problems between planes and drones."
#2: "BRILLIANT!!"
As in most things, the good doctor recognized this and wrote a story about it (or at least pretty close):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The BBC did an analysis of variance on mean time between failures between the ANNOVA system, the previous software system, and doing it manually, and ANNOVA came in worst.
In other words, ANNOVA failed ANOVA.
(Yes, I am a father, but my son doesn't understand statistics, so I have to find another outlet for "Statistical Dad jokes.)
Was there a naked man on all fours following the mower, eating the grass and hedgehog carcasses?
If so, don't call the cops - go with "God bless the grass."
I've used Apple Maps. I'm not sure OSM should want their help.
I think, as most social media posts show, that we've already got far too many space cadets.
He did a bang up job implementing the Winklevii's idea a few years ago. Also, there's some dissatisfaction with how he's doing his current job, so he might be looking for a new project.
Make all security software open source, so everyone can look at it, and the many eyeballs cause problems to be fixed quicker.
"It is important to understand that the FCC's proposed order is based on a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of Internet technology,"
This is very incorrect. The FCC understands that, without net neutrality, internet technology will lock in far more profits for Comcast and their allies. That's the only thing that they care about.
All their verbiage that people are decrying as incorrect is nothing more than FUD to justify a decision that has nothing to do with technology, or what's best for the majority of people, or anything else besides increasing and, more to the point, ensuring profits for the big guys for years to come.
"Even CNN readers know how to use wikipedia."
True, but the link makes it significantly more convenient to find the material by using a single click rather than having to highlight the word, right click, and select "Search Google For...", or copy the material to a new browser window and search for it there.
Ask Amazon about how important being able to complete an action in one click is to the user experience and having people complete transactions.
What happens in the event of your home being destroyed by a fire/hurricane/tornado/earthquake/disaster de jour in your location?
I work with a lot of PhD's, and it appears that if you get one of those, you immediately know everything about everything.
I had a PhD, who had just come back from a 2-day "Scientist to Sea" underway, tell me that I really didn't understand how standing watch worked on a ship, despite my having spent eight years on sea duty in the Navy, but she would be glad to "PhD-splain" it to me.
Hate to tell you this, but there are right/wrong answers to all of the problems you cited. The only one that might have multiple answers, depending upon how you worded it, is how many people can you fit into your house.
My best guess is that most of the people don't like your ideas because they don't think your suggestions would improve the product, not any innate refusal to change.
Think about how many times one of your favorite apps has changed its interface in a way you thought sucked. Do you really think the designers said, "Hey, we've got a great interface, let's make it worse?" No, just like you, they thought their changes would improve it, but they didn't.
A favorite example was when Google removed the Pegman from Maps, making using Streetview almost impossible.
Another problem with Comcast - the 49ers WEREN'T blacked out.
Isn't "monitoring children's classroom activities" pretty much number one on a teacher's list of responsibilities?
Although the poster had an issue with the name, I thought "G Suite" is better than the alternative, "G Spot."
More practical, too - half the population wouldn't use something named "G Spot, since most men can't find it and would swear it doesn't really exist!!
At the end of "Methuselah's Children," after the long-lived Howard Families return to Earth after escaping a lynching, they discover that Earth discovered the fresh blood rejuvenated people. Once they knew this, they had a crash research program to create fresh blood to allow everyone to live well into their hundreds.
if you can find it, the ACM SIGGRAPH's "Story of Computer Graphics" (http://www.siggraph.org/movie/) from 2000 credits 1982's "Tron" as being the first film with significant computer graphics. There is a lot of discussion from people who worked on the CGI about how they did it.
However, to a man, they all said that they walked out of the theater saying, "Meh." They realized that the effects can't make the movie, there has to be something more.
This is one of those completely idiotic "thought experiments" that philosophers are so fond of.
I've been driving for 46 years now (I started early, but am still old) and have probably driven well over half a million miles. I have NEVER had to make a decision, "Do I kill myself or swerve and kill ten innocents?"
Almost nearly everyone on /. drives, and I don't even begin to guess the number of miles driven by this audience: has anyone here ever had to make such a decision? Has anyone even heard of such a decision occurring in the real world? For fighter pilots maybe this is a real concern - the Great Santini and the recent Blue Angel who died (as well as others) supposedly stayed with their aircraft to minimize civilian casualties on the ground. But driving a car???
It's about as smart as worrying about what the AI does in the event of a Martian invasion.
It's got to be named "Hired Girl, Inc." Yes, it's slightly sexist, but with with all the anti-Islamist sentiment, "Aladdin Auto-Engineering" is definitely out.
So after the concert, everyone has to go back through the turnstiles to get their bags unlocked and returned to the promoter? What if someone says they left their phone in the car so they don't need a bag - are they searched? Do people need to surrender something like a license to get a bag? If not, what prevents them from either leaving with the bag or ripping it open during the show, making the process much more expensive for the performer/promoter? What about people who can't bear to be out of contact with their kids caregiver even for the length of a show? I would guess that the bag makes vibration less effective, and they are unlikely to ever hear ringing at a concert. (I wouldn't have an issue with it, but don't respond that they should put up with it since it was common in my day - people's expectations have changed.)
I can understand this more for comedians - a leak of their material is much more important, since the difference between hearing their material on a smartphone or live is pretty small, so long as the audio is good enough to understand. However, the difference between being at a concert and watching someone's cell phone video of a concert is so large that I can't imagine anyone saying, "No, I don't need to go see Alicia (or whomever) - the cell phone video was just as good as being there."
The biggest rip-off, er "homage", was in one of the most popular episodes of TOS, where tribbles were simply the martian flat cats from The Rolling Stones.
I kind of agree with the woman - everyone who has taken diffy q's knows they are evil!!
It did not end well.