Newsflash, hot women aren't the only ones packaged as commodities online. We all are. It's just that hot women are more likely to be commodities for individual people, which we notice much more.
Hm, good point. I know I was being extreme in my original post. Still, it's not clear whether this is an example of someone taking advantage of risky behavior. I don't know if what happened is legally equivalent to someone stealing a car with its doors wide open and key in the ignition (obviously I mean qualitatively, not in severity), or, say, snapping a picture of someone who walked out into the street naked with a dildo up his ass (in which case I believe the person taking the picture is often morally and legally in the clear, though I'm sure it changes depending on state/country). IANAL, help!
Funny thing is, the "outcry" of the users affected should be either directed at FB/4square, or, more appropriately, at the users themselves. It's your own damn fault that you have made so much data publicly available that this is possible. Get your head out of your ass, you're the only one you have to blame...
Reminds me of how the whole country "decided" that Casey Anthony was guilty. After the verdict I saw hundreds of posts on social media (yes, even here, on/.), of people decrying the great injustice of the not guilty verdict. And all these people were only certain of her guilt because "it's obvious", i.e. they had a certain image of her and were sure it meant she's a murderer. NOT because of evidence -- all the evidence was highly circumstantial.
From my machine learning textbook, I believe the story was that they were training a neural net to identify soviet vs US tanks, and, as you say, got 100% accuracy on the training set that turned into noise in the field. It turned out that all the US tanks in the training sample were illuminated from one side (e.g. left), and all soviet tanks from another (e.g. right). The neural net was just detecting that the left side was brighter/darker than the right side.
Pretty much all of forensics is pseudo-science. The public believes it to be infallible, and thousands of people are sent to jail on the word of forensic "scientists" using methods that very well might be barely better than noise. It sucks, and nobody is interested in doing anything about it because 1) only statisticians understand the first thing about statistics, and 2) it would just be too inconvenient for the jail business^W^W American justice system.
I'm pretty sure this calls for a "don't feed the trolls." GP didn't even pretend to make a sound argument supporting a logically sound conclusion. Just spouting tinfoilhattery.
Here's hoping. I would also imagine that the military are already funding superconductor research for other applications, e.g. railguns (superconductors would help there, right?)
You know, one of these days astronomers will actually observe a perfectly teapot-shaped object orbiting somewhere near Neptune, and we're all going to shit our pants.
Wouldn't it then be somewhat appropriate to call the fact that evolution occurs a law? We know that organisms evolve pretty much as well as we know that things fall. Now, explanations of evolution such as natural selection and random mutations are certainly part of a theory, but the simple observation that evolution has, and continues to, occur is much more akin to a law in that sense, no?
Yes, that's why I always back myself up before I take experimental medication. I can't believe there are still people out there who don't make regular backups of themselves. I mean, hello, this is pretty basic stuff here, god!
Hey, what about speak -> spuck? Don't tell me you actually say "speaked"? But seriously, I agree, it's completely irrational.... But it sounds right! "The Congressman snuck in the unconsitutional rider into the extremely popular bill at the last second", or "he snuck into his daughter's bedroom after his wife was sound asleep from the pills he snuck into her late night snack..." See, natural!
In time perhaps "ethically and sustainably manufactured in China" will be the new trendy "organic" label that Yuppies will wear with pride.
And if it's executed in a way at all similar to "organic" foods, it will be just a marketing label often near devoid of meaning... Or at least so I've heard (sorry don't have any sources handy).
Yeah, it seems that while 'sneaked' is older and more likely to be considered THE true version by any authority that accepts only one of the two, 'snuck' seems more natural to many people and is gaining ground in all English speaking countries, even in newspapers (e.g. much more common in Canadian newspapers than 'sneaked').
Slashdot Mirror
Newsflash, hot women aren't the only ones packaged as commodities online. We all are. It's just that hot women are more likely to be commodities for individual people, which we notice much more.
Hm, good point. I know I was being extreme in my original post. Still, it's not clear whether this is an example of someone taking advantage of risky behavior. I don't know if what happened is legally equivalent to someone stealing a car with its doors wide open and key in the ignition (obviously I mean qualitatively, not in severity), or, say, snapping a picture of someone who walked out into the street naked with a dildo up his ass (in which case I believe the person taking the picture is often morally and legally in the clear, though I'm sure it changes depending on state/country). IANAL, help!
Funny thing is, the "outcry" of the users affected should be either directed at FB/4square, or, more appropriately, at the users themselves. It's your own damn fault that you have made so much data publicly available that this is possible. Get your head out of your ass, you're the only one you have to blame...
Better yet, since the world isn't flat, I'd like to see a Minecraft port, complete with variable block resolution.
Reminds me of how the whole country "decided" that Casey Anthony was guilty. After the verdict I saw hundreds of posts on social media (yes, even here, on /.), of people decrying the great injustice of the not guilty verdict. And all these people were only certain of her guilt because "it's obvious", i.e. they had a certain image of her and were sure it meant she's a murderer. NOT because of evidence -- all the evidence was highly circumstantial.
From my machine learning textbook, I believe the story was that they were training a neural net to identify soviet vs US tanks, and, as you say, got 100% accuracy on the training set that turned into noise in the field. It turned out that all the US tanks in the training sample were illuminated from one side (e.g. left), and all soviet tanks from another (e.g. right). The neural net was just detecting that the left side was brighter/darker than the right side.
Pretty much all of forensics is pseudo-science. The public believes it to be infallible, and thousands of people are sent to jail on the word of forensic "scientists" using methods that very well might be barely better than noise. It sucks, and nobody is interested in doing anything about it because 1) only statisticians understand the first thing about statistics, and 2) it would just be too inconvenient for the jail business^W^W American justice system.
*uncomfortable silence, shifting looks*
Commenting to undo accidental "overrated" mod (meant funny). Also, I love the word "unfuck".
I am in machine learning, and you are the worst kind of person. Go kill as many children as you want, but don't you poison my data!
That's cool, the work of Committee agents such as yourself is important enough to warrant some leeway!
I'm pretty sure this calls for a "don't feed the trolls." GP didn't even pretend to make a sound argument supporting a logically sound conclusion. Just spouting tinfoilhattery.
Here's hoping. I would also imagine that the military are already funding superconductor research for other applications, e.g. railguns (superconductors would help there, right?)
You know, one of these days astronomers will actually observe a perfectly teapot-shaped object orbiting somewhere near Neptune, and we're all going to shit our pants.
Because it is an "issue" recently and deliberately manufactured to serve the interests of men on a single-minded quest for power.
You know what, if someone is willing to go through so much trouble for a fucking +1 Insightful, I say let him have it, he earned it...
Wouldn't it then be somewhat appropriate to call the fact that evolution occurs a law? We know that organisms evolve pretty much as well as we know that things fall. Now, explanations of evolution such as natural selection and random mutations are certainly part of a theory, but the simple observation that evolution has, and continues to, occur is much more akin to a law in that sense, no?
You forgot dihydrogen monoxide
... OK, I'm saying "snoke" from now on.
Yes, that's why I always back myself up before I take experimental medication. I can't believe there are still people out there who don't make regular backups of themselves. I mean, hello, this is pretty basic stuff here, god!
Hey, what about speak -> spuck? Don't tell me you actually say "speaked"? But seriously, I agree, it's completely irrational.... But it sounds right! "The Congressman snuck in the unconsitutional rider into the extremely popular bill at the last second", or "he snuck into his daughter's bedroom after his wife was sound asleep from the pills he snuck into her late night snack..." See, natural!
In time perhaps "ethically and sustainably manufactured in China" will be the new trendy "organic" label that Yuppies will wear with pride.
And if it's executed in a way at all similar to "organic" foods, it will be just a marketing label often near devoid of meaning... Or at least so I've heard (sorry don't have any sources handy).
I'm imagining it... Oh sweet Jesus, I'm imagining it!
Yeah, it seems that while 'sneaked' is older and more likely to be considered THE true version by any authority that accepts only one of the two, 'snuck' seems more natural to many people and is gaining ground in all English speaking countries, even in newspapers (e.g. much more common in Canadian newspapers than 'sneaked').
Related: I recently learned that a large portion of the PhD's working at a particular Google office have astrophysics degrees. Go figure.