How many/. articles has there been just this past week on companies getting in trouble with the data they collect about their customers? It seems like there needs to be pretty broad laws that cover how ALL companies are allowed to handle user data. Arguing that they shouldn't collect that data, I think, is a bit silly, especially because it helps companies focus on what products to make or how to better tailor their resources to fit consumer needs. However, selling the privacy I entrusted to company X to company Y is a bit unacceptable. Why not have broad laws that cover these things that allow for opt-in (not opt-out) so we can stop hearing about this nonsense. It's the function of the government to define the rules of the game... where's my government!
Well, remember, Google is bleeding top developers to places like Facebook and other startups since it has grown substantially and most likely doesn't have the startup mentality anymore. Releasing poor code provides as much of a job preview as a resume does for an employer. It doesn't make them look good, especially when Microsoft and Google are going through their largest hiring push ever this year.
It sounds like your experience with training is more about poor training environments than it is about the usefulness of training itself. Training is supposed to... well, train you. Train you for what? For actually using the software in real environments for real problems and creating real solutions. If the training isn't accomplishing this it may be that the training company/trainer/consultant is garbage.
Where I live (middle of nowhere in Canada) it almost looks like your eyes just aren't focusing properly; it's basically a white "haze" that stretches across the sky.
Really? It sounds like someone from the board of education had a sit down with a statistician and thought it would sound cool to throw in the null because, for some reason, ID is the default explanation for the origin of species. I mean, this isn't a bad thing considering the vast amount of evidence in support of natural selection, ultimately suggesting that we can confidently reject the null.
They also may want to take a look at Jacob Cohen's classic paper, 'the world is round, p.05' for more information about the current Fisherian statistical paradigm we currently exist in and what it means to establish a null (and ultimately reject or fail to reject it).
Could anyone inform the other readers (and myself) about perhaps what kinds of things it would take to start up new ISPs? I mean, if we hate AT&T and Verizon so much and it only seems that Google is here pushing the Internet envelop, why aren't more entrepreneurs starting ISPs (other than it is probably expensive, just like any other business startup)?
When have users ever cares or understood what they are doing? This is the entire premise of the Apple machine. They assume you don't; look how popular that has become.
For why we need larger quantities and higher quality carriers and ISPs. It's not like this is the first time hardware advances have put pressure on specific sectors to improve their services. Most providers are already giving the US some of the worst bandwidth you can get in the modern world. And now non-tech users (read: smartphone and tablet users) are becoming complacent with data plans and shabby speeds that it's becoming this pathetic norm. The one recent ray of hope is Google's Kansas City project where they're getting some of the best stuff in the country while someone in LA is sitting there twittling their thumbs with 3mpbs Internet speed. Oh boy...
I don't think they will have the same problem because they will have the freedom to experiment with their own products. For example, we've seen a shift toward 99 cent books and apps, away from the traditional models of valuing products by X (e.g. author, topic, length, etc). With more variation the best models will prevail, and by best I mean most successful and profitable. Clearly the models employed now are not working because people are turning to piracy.
Indeed, big media has gotten new media wrong for decades, if not centuries. However, for the first time in history we have the technology to support new media WITHOUT big media. It doesn't take a giant publisher to create a best selling book anymore and put it on e-readers, apps, itunes, or other distribution systems. Nor does it take big developers to distribute boxes of games or other products.
What we will eventually see is the decline (but not abolishment) of big media in favor of independent distributors. The point is that they can do anything they want for copyright laws but the internet and its users are much too savvy and agile . They can't stop the momentum and they'll keep throwing money at the problem thinking it will stop the hemorrhagic. How often do we see on/. articles about how piracy is the result of poor products not poor regulations. Ah who cares...
Data is not selectively chosen, solutions are based on empirical evidence among many other factors. George Box, one of the great statisticians of modern science explained, "all models are wrong, some models are useful". However, if you have no idea about statistics or inferential theories that underly modern science you can continue spouting nonsense. Let the adults finish this conversation.
Not necessarily. Functional ascetics are critical when it comes to organizational behaviors. For example, if you work in a startup company that requires quick decision-making and on the fly meetings and discussions to bounce ideas around, if your organization is build hierarchically with lots of cubicles, no open spaces, isolated rooms or floors that limit access to people or resources... it makes the job of every single worker much more difficult across many tasks.
Ultimately, work environments should be congruent with their objectives. If you work in a more slow-paced environment (e.g. utilities, banks) then one type of environment might benefit the workers. On the other hand, if you work in a very face-paced environment you should build an organization that supports the types of needs that workers will have (e.g. room to work collaboratively, easy access to superiors, resources, etc).
Apparently you have never worked with data. It's an incredibly creative process, especially when all answers are technically correct but only certain ones are more helpful, useful, or easily interpretable.
It don't think it it ego as much as it is professors prioritizing what they need to do. At a minimum, their job requires that they (1) publish, (2) teach, (3) win grants to bring in money for the school. Even for professors who are tenured, they still need to fulfill these requirements. This doesn't even include meeting with students, advising doctoral candidates, reviewing for journals they are published in (i.e. once you pub in a journal you become a reviewer for them), writing personal books on topics, or organizing school/student events.
Professors, in their defense, have a hell of a lot going on. Ego may be the reason why some of them don't contribute, but I think a lot of it has to do with simply being busy. Being a professors (especially a tenure-track professor) is a full time, 7 day a week job.
Describing clay pottery and shells as garbage is incredibly misleading. For an article that claims to be from a scientific website, this is a shame. This article is the reason no-brainer issues become politicized. Some poor consumer of the internet will go and tell policy-maker Mr. XYZ that garbage helps the environment. Enter stage left BP, Exxon. Mr. Policy-Maker says that pollution isn't a big deal -> Who cares about pollution, oil, etc. And the sustainable energy movement takes yet another step back all because of some pop-science article claiming garbage helps the environment. Are you kidding me...
...and I don't agree with the stance my government is taking. Just in case all the non-US slashdotters go on about how X, Y, and Z America is. It's not all of us, scouts honor =)
There is a whole lot of hate in the above comments. Especially within a website that values science, math, and technology, why should he be shunned? We need more people who are willing to make the necessary sacrifices (e.g. social, monetary, etc) to devote all of their energy toward progressing humanity forward.
Good for him. Keep it up. Go invent something even better. And next time, bring some people along with you so even more people can see the value in science and the scientific process. It's a shame that society doesn't value these walks of life when they govern everything we do in the modern world.
I'm sorry but there seems to be a discrepancy with regard to how representatives view NN. It is not a government regulation anymore than the first amendment 'regulates' that speech must be free. Likewise, NN 'regulates' that information must be unbiased. This notion of forced freedom as a form of regulation is probably the most far fetched form of 'regulation' that I have seen. But it should be clear that NN merely forces information to be unbiased. Regulation is a form of constriction on some greater pool. In other words, regulation selects a subset of options from a grand set. NN could not be regarded as regulation because it restricts corporate regulation. NN is, therefore, the antithesis of regulation.
Fair enough, thriving may have been too optimistic a word. But I think one could argue that things are shaking and they won't stop for quite some time. It started in Iran but no one was surprised when Ahmadinejad rolled in the tanks, he's already part of our favorite axis of evil. Egypt, Tunisia, even Iraq is feeling it. Will it result in a beautifully organized democracy? Of course not. But this is the kind of thinking the west has been waiting for. People overthrowing their shitty governments. The more Libya defies their citizens the easier it is for everyone to point the finger at them, rally support for democracy, and move the issue forward. Are we there yet? No, you're right, they're not. But like I said, it's an important step forward and a pretty commendable one if the US intel machine is involved.
If the wave of manufactured democracy has any foundation from the US government, bravo sirs. We have been trying to artificial create democracy in the middle east for quite some time. Right before Obama is beginning the Afghan pull out, democracy not only appears, but thrives. Massive propaganda success? Maybe. Who cares. Mission accomplished. I, for one, hope that the strain on oil continues. I'm in CA atm and we're up to $4.10 for regular but the long term goal is that this forces us to reconsider alternatives: serious alternatives, seriously.
It is only when gas gets so ridiculously high that average citizens actually change their behavior that we as a nation can change. It forces us. And, as previous posters have noted, this will not solve the entire energy problem but it will allow for an ecosystem to grow in society where you can have a broad range of thoughts: robber barons, genuine captains of industry, small fixes, big fixes, fixes for cars, fixes for electricity. It allows for what Don Campbell called an 'experimenting society'. Rather, a society where everyone can (through science) solve the woes of humanity. Building that kind of society is the first step but it isn't the last.
Slashdot Mirror
How many /. articles has there been just this past week on companies getting in trouble with the data they collect about their customers? It seems like there needs to be pretty broad laws that cover how ALL companies are allowed to handle user data. Arguing that they shouldn't collect that data, I think, is a bit silly, especially because it helps companies focus on what products to make or how to better tailor their resources to fit consumer needs. However, selling the privacy I entrusted to company X to company Y is a bit unacceptable. Why not have broad laws that cover these things that allow for opt-in (not opt-out) so we can stop hearing about this nonsense. It's the function of the government to define the rules of the game... where's my government!
Well, remember, Google is bleeding top developers to places like Facebook and other startups since it has grown substantially and most likely doesn't have the startup mentality anymore. Releasing poor code provides as much of a job preview as a resume does for an employer. It doesn't make them look good, especially when Microsoft and Google are going through their largest hiring push ever this year.
Incoming department of homeland security, protectin us for the terrrists.
It sounds like your experience with training is more about poor training environments than it is about the usefulness of training itself. Training is supposed to... well, train you. Train you for what? For actually using the software in real environments for real problems and creating real solutions. If the training isn't accomplishing this it may be that the training company/trainer/consultant is garbage.
Where I live (middle of nowhere in Canada) it almost looks like your eyes just aren't focusing properly; it's basically a white "haze" that stretches across the sky.
In southern California, we call that pollution.
Really? It sounds like someone from the board of education had a sit down with a statistician and thought it would sound cool to throw in the null because, for some reason, ID is the default explanation for the origin of species. I mean, this isn't a bad thing considering the vast amount of evidence in support of natural selection, ultimately suggesting that we can confidently reject the null.
They also may want to take a look at Jacob Cohen's classic paper, 'the world is round, p .05' for more information about the current Fisherian statistical paradigm we currently exist in and what it means to establish a null (and ultimately reject or fail to reject it).
R.I.P Osama Bin Laden - World Hide And Go Seek Champion (2001 - 2011)
Could anyone inform the other readers (and myself) about perhaps what kinds of things it would take to start up new ISPs? I mean, if we hate AT&T and Verizon so much and it only seems that Google is here pushing the Internet envelop, why aren't more entrepreneurs starting ISPs (other than it is probably expensive, just like any other business startup)?
When have users ever cares or understood what they are doing? This is the entire premise of the Apple machine. They assume you don't; look how popular that has become.
The rate of production is too high by a factor of 40.
What does this mean? Genuinely curious.
For why we need larger quantities and higher quality carriers and ISPs. It's not like this is the first time hardware advances have put pressure on specific sectors to improve their services. Most providers are already giving the US some of the worst bandwidth you can get in the modern world. And now non-tech users (read: smartphone and tablet users) are becoming complacent with data plans and shabby speeds that it's becoming this pathetic norm. The one recent ray of hope is Google's Kansas City project where they're getting some of the best stuff in the country while someone in LA is sitting there twittling their thumbs with 3mpbs Internet speed. Oh boy...
I don't think they will have the same problem because they will have the freedom to experiment with their own products. For example, we've seen a shift toward 99 cent books and apps, away from the traditional models of valuing products by X (e.g. author, topic, length, etc). With more variation the best models will prevail, and by best I mean most successful and profitable. Clearly the models employed now are not working because people are turning to piracy.
Indeed, big media has gotten new media wrong for decades, if not centuries. However, for the first time in history we have the technology to support new media WITHOUT big media. It doesn't take a giant publisher to create a best selling book anymore and put it on e-readers, apps, itunes, or other distribution systems. Nor does it take big developers to distribute boxes of games or other products.
What we will eventually see is the decline (but not abolishment) of big media in favor of independent distributors. The point is that they can do anything they want for copyright laws but the internet and its users are much too savvy and agile . They can't stop the momentum and they'll keep throwing money at the problem thinking it will stop the hemorrhagic. How often do we see on /. articles about how piracy is the result of poor products not poor regulations. Ah who cares...
Data is not selectively chosen, solutions are based on empirical evidence among many other factors. George Box, one of the great statisticians of modern science explained, "all models are wrong, some models are useful". However, if you have no idea about statistics or inferential theories that underly modern science you can continue spouting nonsense. Let the adults finish this conversation.
Not necessarily. Functional ascetics are critical when it comes to organizational behaviors. For example, if you work in a startup company that requires quick decision-making and on the fly meetings and discussions to bounce ideas around, if your organization is build hierarchically with lots of cubicles, no open spaces, isolated rooms or floors that limit access to people or resources... it makes the job of every single worker much more difficult across many tasks.
Ultimately, work environments should be congruent with their objectives. If you work in a more slow-paced environment (e.g. utilities, banks) then one type of environment might benefit the workers. On the other hand, if you work in a very face-paced environment you should build an organization that supports the types of needs that workers will have (e.g. room to work collaboratively, easy access to superiors, resources, etc).
Apparently you have never worked with data. It's an incredibly creative process, especially when all answers are technically correct but only certain ones are more helpful, useful, or easily interpretable.
It don't think it it ego as much as it is professors prioritizing what they need to do. At a minimum, their job requires that they (1) publish, (2) teach, (3) win grants to bring in money for the school. Even for professors who are tenured, they still need to fulfill these requirements. This doesn't even include meeting with students, advising doctoral candidates, reviewing for journals they are published in (i.e. once you pub in a journal you become a reviewer for them), writing personal books on topics, or organizing school/student events.
Professors, in their defense, have a hell of a lot going on. Ego may be the reason why some of them don't contribute, but I think a lot of it has to do with simply being busy. Being a professors (especially a tenure-track professor) is a full time, 7 day a week job.
Describing clay pottery and shells as garbage is incredibly misleading. For an article that claims to be from a scientific website, this is a shame. This article is the reason no-brainer issues become politicized. Some poor consumer of the internet will go and tell policy-maker Mr. XYZ that garbage helps the environment. Enter stage left BP, Exxon. Mr. Policy-Maker says that pollution isn't a big deal -> Who cares about pollution, oil, etc. And the sustainable energy movement takes yet another step back all because of some pop-science article claiming garbage helps the environment. Are you kidding me...
It permits everything but foreign occupation. Pretty sure we are a go on any invasion. I could be wrong though.
Don Campbell kind of created a similar vision, he called it the experimenting society. Check it out.
...and I don't agree with the stance my government is taking. Just in case all the non-US slashdotters go on about how X, Y, and Z America is. It's not all of us, scouts honor =)
There is a whole lot of hate in the above comments. Especially within a website that values science, math, and technology, why should he be shunned? We need more people who are willing to make the necessary sacrifices (e.g. social, monetary, etc) to devote all of their energy toward progressing humanity forward.
Good for him. Keep it up. Go invent something even better. And next time, bring some people along with you so even more people can see the value in science and the scientific process. It's a shame that society doesn't value these walks of life when they govern everything we do in the modern world.
I'm sorry but there seems to be a discrepancy with regard to how representatives view NN. It is not a government regulation anymore than the first amendment 'regulates' that speech must be free. Likewise, NN 'regulates' that information must be unbiased. This notion of forced freedom as a form of regulation is probably the most far fetched form of 'regulation' that I have seen. But it should be clear that NN merely forces information to be unbiased. Regulation is a form of constriction on some greater pool. In other words, regulation selects a subset of options from a grand set. NN could not be regarded as regulation because it restricts corporate regulation. NN is, therefore, the antithesis of regulation.
Fair enough, thriving may have been too optimistic a word. But I think one could argue that things are shaking and they won't stop for quite some time. It started in Iran but no one was surprised when Ahmadinejad rolled in the tanks, he's already part of our favorite axis of evil. Egypt, Tunisia, even Iraq is feeling it. Will it result in a beautifully organized democracy? Of course not. But this is the kind of thinking the west has been waiting for. People overthrowing their shitty governments. The more Libya defies their citizens the easier it is for everyone to point the finger at them, rally support for democracy, and move the issue forward. Are we there yet? No, you're right, they're not. But like I said, it's an important step forward and a pretty commendable one if the US intel machine is involved.
If the wave of manufactured democracy has any foundation from the US government, bravo sirs. We have been trying to artificial create democracy in the middle east for quite some time. Right before Obama is beginning the Afghan pull out, democracy not only appears, but thrives. Massive propaganda success? Maybe. Who cares. Mission accomplished. I, for one, hope that the strain on oil continues. I'm in CA atm and we're up to $4.10 for regular but the long term goal is that this forces us to reconsider alternatives: serious alternatives, seriously.
It is only when gas gets so ridiculously high that average citizens actually change their behavior that we as a nation can change. It forces us. And, as previous posters have noted, this will not solve the entire energy problem but it will allow for an ecosystem to grow in society where you can have a broad range of thoughts: robber barons, genuine captains of industry, small fixes, big fixes, fixes for cars, fixes for electricity. It allows for what Don Campbell called an 'experimenting society'. Rather, a society where everyone can (through science) solve the woes of humanity. Building that kind of society is the first step but it isn't the last.