The article uses the word "accurate" which has a precise definition already. It is the percentage of correct answers. And yes it doesn't tell you anything about the false positive rate and false negative rates. Though in this case since you are dealing with a very small chance event it implies enough to reach the conclusions the article does.
If 1% of the population are terrorists then to get a 90% accuracy the false positive rate must be between 9.1% and 10.1%, so just using 10% is good enough for this back of the envelope stuff. As the percentage of actual terrorists goes up the range widens, but as it goes down it narrows. Orders or magnitude less than 1% of air travelers hijack or blow up the plane. If the percentage is actually 0.1% our range gets to 9.91% to 10.01%.
Which makes it seems to me that just using the accuracy as the false positive rate for an article like that is perfectly acceptable.
Someone sent them shitty US cables, since they're european they figured black is really just dark grey so lets use the black cables as grey. That leaves the red cables to use as brown.
And hope that is an IEC guy ever sees it he is colour blind.
People assign value to things based upon things unrelated to how "good" they are objectively. Expecting them not to do in the art world seems the sillier than the fact that people like to do that.
The creator is one such way, rarity is another.
This isn't just the art world. Some people will pay considerably more for a baseball signed by babe Ruth than they would for one signed by me. Others will pay more for a copy of "The C Programming Language" signed by Kernighan and Ritchie than they would for one written in by me.
Subsistence living is a different beast. As is having more kids than you can afford with a reasonable job - what is the point of supporting the kids if you never see them anyway?
Being in the military is a separate thing too, I would assume the "retire early" applies, but modified to be "I don't expect to be doing this for my entire working life, but it is worth it in the short/medium term". Where "worth it" could be a lot of things from expecting a long career in the military not involving being in a warzone all their lives, or a jump start on a civilian career with the training/experience/etc the military provided, or just plain old "I will suffer and risk my life for my country because I am a patriot". And don't forget "I love shooting stuff":)
There are plenty of jobs that nobody could possibly want to do.
Sure there are less now that we have car building robots and so on.
I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped. No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.
Harvesting a field isn't fun either, at least that one is essential to humanity though.
Same thing. The UK is moronic for doing such extraditions. That the US doesn't do them in return doesn't reflect badly on the US.
If the UK wants to be at the beck and call of the US and comply with their every demand, that's their choice, but that's a problem with the UK not with the US.
Farmer Joe decides to get into the orange juice business and hires a bunch of juicers - illegal immigrants who squeeze oranges with their toes. One of the juicers keeps using lemons instead of oranges so Farmer Joe fires them. Another refuses to register to vote and vote for Farmer Joe's preferred presidential candidate so Farmer Joe fires them.
The product finally makes it to the supermarkets and it turns out most people don't like the toe-jam flavor after all. So Farmer Joe lays off 75% of his juicers since he doesn't need as much juice to meet the demand as he expected.
After the bulk of the population knows not to try Joe's Orange Juice the number of complaint letters reduces so that Farmer Joe doesn't need the secretary he had also hired at the start, so he lays her off.
If the UK wants to extradite people to Iran because they wore a bikini at the beach then that is their choice. That the US does not, isn't an indication that the US is arrogant it's an indication that the US isn't completely moronic.
And yes the US will arrest people who have committed what the US considers as a crime outside US jurisdiction, if they are stupid enough to enter US jurisdiction. That also doesn't make them arrogant, it makes them oppressive assholes but that's a different thing entirely.
Of course the US makes exceptions for "terrorists" they'll ignore jurisdiction and kidnap them from some country in which they have broken no law. But again that doesn't make the arrogant, it makes them a rogue state who happens to have enough nukes to destroy the world and hence is ignored.
Since when does the amount of work have anything to do with whether something is copyrighted or not?
It would be a lot more work for me to manually type the text from an old KJ bible than it would for me to write an article on the history of that bible. Doesn't make the former more worthy of copyright than the later.
What work did the Christopher and Priscilla Tolkien do on this film exactly?
Re:Seriously people use anything but ssh/scp/sftp?
on
R.I.P. FTP
·
· Score: 1
It isn't easier.
If I had to remember 47 password they would either be so simple that you wouldn't have to steal them. Or there would really only be 3 unique ones. Or they'd all be stored on the computer anyway.
So stealing that one pass phrase and key isn't any easier than stealing 47 passwords.
Plus the advantage that the admin on one of those machine can't tweak the login/passwd/whatever commands and collect a password that will work on some of those other 46 machines.
Seriously people use anything but ssh/scp/sftp???
on
R.I.P. FTP
·
· Score: 1
Using a key-pair is *so* much easier than remembering 47 different passwords I'm amazed people use anything else.
Slashdot Mirror
The article uses the word "accurate" which has a precise definition already. It is the percentage of correct answers. And yes it doesn't tell you anything about the false positive rate and false negative rates. Though in this case since you are dealing with a very small chance event it implies enough to reach the conclusions the article does.
If 1% of the population are terrorists then to get a 90% accuracy the false positive rate must be between 9.1% and 10.1%, so just using 10% is good enough for this back of the envelope stuff. As the percentage of actual terrorists goes up the range widens, but as it goes down it narrows. Orders or magnitude less than 1% of air travelers hijack or blow up the plane. If the percentage is actually 0.1% our range gets to 9.91% to 10.01%.
Which makes it seems to me that just using the accuracy as the false positive rate for an article like that is perfectly acceptable.
Someone sent them shitty US cables, since they're european they figured black is really just dark grey so lets use the black cables as grey. That leaves the red cables to use as brown.
And hope that is an IEC guy ever sees it he is colour blind.
The USSR cheated the simplest way, they just decided who would be on the ballot. Then everyone got to vote for that person.
Makes counting easier I guess.
People assign value to things based upon things unrelated to how "good" they are objectively. Expecting them not to do in the art world seems the sillier than the fact that people like to do that.
The creator is one such way, rarity is another.
This isn't just the art world. Some people will pay considerably more for a baseball signed by babe Ruth than they would for one signed by me. Others will pay more for a copy of "The C Programming Language" signed by Kernighan and Ritchie than they would for one written in by me.
Why is it "incredibly silly" for people to value something the way they want?
Sure I would never pay $20 for a single pokemon card, but if someone else wants to that's their business.
Same with BoA stock and antique furniture and art.
Are you seriously trying to claim that I can't release software for a non-Free OS under the GPL.
I'm not artistically talented enough for that to be fun.
If they actually had an effect on the damn creature it might have been fun.
That is one part the 4 year old liked a lot though.
Subsistence living is a different beast. As is having more kids than you can afford with a reasonable job - what is the point of supporting the kids if you never see them anyway?
Being in the military is a separate thing too, I would assume the "retire early" applies, but modified to be "I don't expect to be doing this for my entire working life, but it is worth it in the short/medium term". Where "worth it" could be a lot of things from expecting a long career in the military not involving being in a warzone all their lives, or a jump start on a civilian career with the training/experience/etc the military provided, or just plain old "I will suffer and risk my life for my country because I am a patriot". And don't forget "I love shooting stuff" :)
If you are willing to travel 4 hours a day for a job, then the same set of criteria apply.
Anyone who works 13 hours a day, either likes their job or is earning enough money that they are going to retire early.
Or is a workaholic and will be exploited by the corporate machine for their entire existence.
There are plenty of jobs that nobody could possibly want to do.
Sure there are less now that we have car building robots and so on.
I worked a couple of months between semesters once on a production line that was taking shrink wrapped cartoons of cigarettes, opening them and putting them into smaller promotional packages that were then shrink wrapped. No one could have possibly enjoyed that work, and it certainly wasn't benefiting humanity.
Harvesting a field isn't fun either, at least that one is essential to humanity though.
Obviously you are have no idea what you are talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hew_Raymond_Griffiths
Same thing. The UK is moronic for doing such extraditions. That the US doesn't do them in return doesn't reflect badly on the US.
If the UK wants to be at the beck and call of the US and comply with their every demand, that's their choice, but that's a problem with the UK not with the US.
Which parts?
I must have blinked past them.
I do admit the four year old likes it, but that wasn't the person I got it for.
Farmer Joe decides to get into the orange juice business and hires a bunch of juicers - illegal immigrants who squeeze oranges with their toes. One of the juicers keeps using lemons instead of oranges so Farmer Joe fires them. Another refuses to register to vote and vote for Farmer Joe's preferred presidential candidate so Farmer Joe fires them.
The product finally makes it to the supermarkets and it turns out most people don't like the toe-jam flavor after all. So Farmer Joe lays off 75% of his juicers since he doesn't need as much juice to meet the demand as he expected.
After the bulk of the population knows not to try Joe's Orange Juice the number of complaint letters reduces so that Farmer Joe doesn't need the secretary he had also hired at the start, so he lays her off.
The first two weren't layoffs, the last two were.
You mean because the US isn't completely stupid?
If the UK wants to extradite people to Iran because they wore a bikini at the beach then that is their choice. That the US does not, isn't an indication that the US is arrogant it's an indication that the US isn't completely moronic.
And yes the US will arrest people who have committed what the US considers as a crime outside US jurisdiction, if they are stupid enough to enter US jurisdiction. That also doesn't make them arrogant, it makes them oppressive assholes but that's a different thing entirely.
Of course the US makes exceptions for "terrorists" they'll ignore jurisdiction and kidnap them from some country in which they have broken no law. But again that doesn't make the arrogant, it makes them a rogue state who happens to have enough nukes to destroy the world and hence is ignored.
It doesn't violate US law, that's the entire point...
A copy of a public domain work is public domain itself in the US. In the UK that isn't the case.
So in the US those professionally taken photographs of public domain works are public domain. In the UK they are not.
Since when does the amount of work have anything to do with whether something is copyrighted or not?
It would be a lot more work for me to manually type the text from an old KJ bible than it would for me to write an article on the history of that bible. Doesn't make the former more worthy of copyright than the later.
No, but that would be just as stupid.
Plus of course impossible to tell if something is still copyrighted when the person is alive, so why not just Life?
Why do I get sick, but you get ill?
Why do you buy things, but I purchase them?
Of course. Life + X terms are stupid.
What work did the Christopher and Priscilla Tolkien do on this film exactly?
It isn't easier.
If I had to remember 47 password they would either be so simple that you wouldn't have to steal them. Or there would really only be 3 unique ones. Or they'd all be stored on the computer anyway.
So stealing that one pass phrase and key isn't any easier than stealing 47 passwords.
Plus the advantage that the admin on one of those machine can't tweak the login/passwd/whatever commands and collect a password that will work on some of those other 46 machines.
Using a key-pair is *so* much easier than remembering 47 different passwords I'm amazed people use anything else.
Don't go to a CS school. Go to a school that tries to churn out flavor of the month language programmers.
Surely that's obvious?