The kids might be rude asking the same stupid question over and over, but isn't that what reporters and voters do?
And don't many if not most posters on internet fora (such as Slashdot) post the same answers and responses over and over and over and over?
People tend to overlook the fact that democracy is the exact opposite of individual rights. The Founding Fathers (USA) tried to implement a _representative_ democarcy to avoid the massive probems of lynch mob mentality (aka Social Justice). The internet, since usenet, has increased the size of the mobs and the directness of communications.
And the much-feared anonymity is not really causing the problem. Example: facebook.
Things don't go too well for car companies that cheat.
ummmm, you need to add: depending on the time frame and funding sources.
Eventually, the chickens may come home to roost (karma), but even if/when it does, the current execs making the decisions may have already made as much money as they were expecting to anyways. Which actual human decision-maker is going to get all the blame for Volkswagen cheating?
The main problem I have with measuring reaction time is that the law is based on slowed reactions, not actual time. I suspect a _legally_ drunk (not socially drunk) college student has faster reaction times than his sober grandfather. If reaction time actually matters, then let's have a speed test and if you fail, you fail regardless of whether you are drunk, old, stupid or uncoordinated.
Many people react differently to alcohol as well. But you have to draw the line somewhere. If we get the drunks and stoners off the road, is it really a big tragedy if a few semi-sober people are removed as well?
It's a waste of time and resources. Drunk/stoned people _have_ accidents, they don't cause them. That's why texting while driving is equally dangerous.
If 40% of all the drivers on the road are drunk and the percentage of drivers involved in drunk-driving accidents is 40%, then drinking doesn't matter any more than eye color or height.
In other words, removing all drunk drivers would not cause a 40% reduction in accidents. We already know this for records in dry places.
Actual industry statisticians think about 2% of the accidents are _caused_ by actual drunkenness.
I believe in liberal morality but conservative economics. I think we ought to move America back to the way it was in the 1950s economically, with a 90% tax rate and a huge investment in infrastructure that included education, the interstate highway system, and building spaceships. That makes me a liberal tho so I don't really understand what it is fiscal conservatives want. Investing in America is not the same thing as letting rich folks take most of the cream off the top of the economy.
If it's _my_ mind deciding unconsciously, then it's still me, and I'm still deciding.
Free will doesn't necessarily mean conscious free will.
We already know we have that: We can choose to prefer logic or not. Following a logical chain isn't free, but choosing to follow it certainly is, and that's conscious.
According to math, the Drake equations are bullshit.
If you add enough time to any probability, it becomes certain. Therefore you cannot use time anymore than you can multiply or divide by zero and get anything useful.
To calculate the probability of life in the universe accurately (as accurately as guesses can be;-) without incorporating time, then all you need is the number of stars currently in the universe. I'm going with 10 to the 20th power. That means in order for life to be unique on our planet, we just have to have 20 events each with a 1 in 10 chance of occurring. Doesn't seem as likely now, does it?
Remember, multiply anything by zero means you end up with zero.
Adding in enough time (or throws) makes _any_ probability certain which is why real statisticians avoid time.
Collective punishment is the only thing that works when dealing with societies (collections of people). Sanctions against Iran or travel bans against North Carolina affect everybody in the areas, not just the folks who are in total agreement with whatever is causing heartburn for the "morally correct."
I'm not saying collective punishment is good, but there really is nothing else.
Have you ever read the history of road design in the little ditty; what horse's ass designed this road?
Having different gauges in Europe and Russia was a good idea so neither Germany nor Russia could easily invade each other.
...Looks like it was mainly a modified language translator, instead of translating language A to language B it translated a statement or question to a response..... The possible responses look to be mined from over a million twitter posts.
And that's different from real meatspace human talk in what significant way?
Of course, if China asked Apple for help breaking into an iPhone to find terrorists, I suspect the American Republicans would not be on board with that.
Unfortunately those require effective air superiority before they can be used. They are easily shot down by ground fire, and even a lucky foot soldier who hits the pilot during a turn can turn one into a fireball.
Uh, that's the story military contractors tell you. OTOH, we're currently bombing enemies with B-52s that are NOT getting shot down. We don't actually need stealth bombers. In fact, if you want to carpet bomb AND PUT THE FEAR OF GOD INTO PEOPLE, you want big loud bombers flying over targets. Similarly, helicopters actually work and they can go fast and haul lots of folks. And if you need to haul more people, build more helicopters. Seems to me aerotech is a solved problem.
War on the other hand, is not a solved problem. The US has the biggest godamned military in the world by a huge margin. How's that working out for us?
From a probability perspective, the Drake equations are crap. If there are 10 to the 29th stars in the universe, then that means in order for life to be unique in the universe, we need 29 events in a row with a 1 in 10 chance of occurring. If we're just trying to be unique in this here local galaxy of 100 billion stars, then we only needs 11 events in a row with a 1 in 10 chance of happening.
For all the folks who think Apple should write software to break a phone used by terrorists in America, ask yourself how you'd feel about China asking Apple to help track down one of their local terrorists. China is as legal a government as the USA's is.
Why weren't they forced to do this for the Silk Road case?
Silk Road's ip address was discovered thru examining a bunch of on-line records, as was the email identity of the founder. No hack was involved. Once they had a target, social hacking occurred.
From the government's pov, the debate is between the user of the phone and the owner. Fareed the mental case "terrorist" locked the phone but the owner is the county organization he worked for. They paid for the phone and the account and they are fully onboard with finding out what their employee used it for.
That's not quite the same as a citizen's right against the govt.
Forcing Apple to write some sw that doesn't exist seems onerous to me even in this case.
But employers may think different about buying iPhones for their employees now.
quite the interesting conundrum.
Slashdot Mirror
The main reason I like Agile-style development is sometimes the programmers have a chance to finish the task before the users change their minds.
The kids might be rude asking the same stupid question over and over, but isn't that what reporters and voters do?
And don't many if not most posters on internet fora (such as Slashdot) post the same answers and responses over and over and over and over?
People tend to overlook the fact that democracy is the exact opposite of individual rights. The Founding Fathers (USA) tried to implement a _representative_ democarcy to avoid the massive probems of lynch mob mentality (aka Social Justice). The internet, since usenet, has increased the size of the mobs and the directness of communications.
And the much-feared anonymity is not really causing the problem. Example: facebook.
You could hire teenagers and retirees to stage accidents. Then WAZE reports will be accurate.
When did Sundar Pichai manage to convert to Judaism? I thought it was quite a lengthy process.
Yes converting is very difficult. You have to change mothers.
Farms don't overuse antibiotics to keep their animals healthy; they overuse them to make them gain weight faster.
If you think about it, that robot can work 24/7 365. So recalculate that number to do that and it will pay for its self in 2 months tops
And it doesn't even need to get a liberal arts degree first.
Things don't go too well for car companies that cheat.
ummmm, you need to add: depending on the time frame and funding sources.
Eventually, the chickens may come home to roost (karma), but even if/when it does, the current execs making the decisions may have already made as much money as they were expecting to anyways. Which actual human decision-maker is going to get all the blame for Volkswagen cheating?
The main problem I have with measuring reaction time is that the law is based on slowed reactions, not actual time. I suspect a _legally_ drunk (not socially drunk) college student has faster reaction times than his sober grandfather. If reaction time actually matters, then let's have a speed test and if you fail, you fail regardless of whether you are drunk, old, stupid or uncoordinated.
Many people react differently to alcohol as well. But you have to draw the line somewhere. If we get the drunks and stoners off the road, is it really a big tragedy if a few semi-sober people are removed as well?
It's a waste of time and resources. Drunk/stoned people _have_ accidents, they don't cause them. That's why texting while driving is equally dangerous.
If 40% of all the drivers on the road are drunk and the percentage of drivers involved in drunk-driving accidents is 40%, then drinking doesn't matter any more than eye color or height.
In other words, removing all drunk drivers would not cause a 40% reduction in accidents. We already know this for records in dry places.
Actual industry statisticians think about 2% of the accidents are _caused_ by actual drunkenness.
I believe in liberal morality but conservative economics. I think we ought to move America back to the way it was in the 1950s economically, with a 90% tax rate and a huge investment in infrastructure that included education, the interstate highway system, and building spaceships. That makes me a liberal tho so I don't really understand what it is fiscal conservatives want. Investing in America is not the same thing as letting rich folks take most of the cream off the top of the economy.
If it's _my_ mind deciding unconsciously, then it's still me, and I'm still deciding.
Free will doesn't necessarily mean conscious free will.
We already know we have that: We can choose to prefer logic or not. Following a logical chain isn't free, but choosing to follow it certainly is, and that's conscious.
According to math, the Drake equations are bullshit.
;-) without incorporating time, then all you need is the number of stars currently in the universe. I'm going with 10 to the 20th power. That means in order for life to be unique on our planet, we just have to have 20 events each with a 1 in 10 chance of occurring. Doesn't seem as likely now, does it?
If you add enough time to any probability, it becomes certain. Therefore you cannot use time anymore than you can multiply or divide by zero and get anything useful.
To calculate the probability of life in the universe accurately (as accurately as guesses can be
Remember, multiply anything by zero means you end up with zero.
Adding in enough time (or throws) makes _any_ probability certain which is why real statisticians avoid time.
Collective punishment is the only thing that works when dealing with societies (collections of people). Sanctions against Iran or travel bans against North Carolina affect everybody in the areas, not just the folks who are in total agreement with whatever is causing heartburn for the "morally correct."
I'm not saying collective punishment is good, but there really is nothing else.
So you're just going to plug any random phone into the Texalyzer. I see a new route for viruses and Trojans.
Have you ever read the history of road design in the little ditty; what horse's ass designed this road?
Having different gauges in Europe and Russia was a good idea so neither Germany nor Russia could easily invade each other.
...Looks like it was mainly a modified language translator, instead of translating language A to language B it translated a statement or question to a response..... The possible responses look to be mined from over a million twitter posts.
And that's different from real meatspace human talk in what significant way?
terrorism in china? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=terrorism...
Of course, if China asked Apple for help breaking into an iPhone to find terrorists, I suspect the American Republicans would not be on board with that.
Unfortunately those require effective air superiority before they can be used. They are easily shot down by ground fire, and even a lucky foot soldier who hits the pilot during a turn can turn one into a fireball.
Uh, that's the story military contractors tell you. OTOH, we're currently bombing enemies with B-52s that are NOT getting shot down. We don't actually need stealth bombers. In fact, if you want to carpet bomb AND PUT THE FEAR OF GOD INTO PEOPLE, you want big loud bombers flying over targets. Similarly, helicopters actually work and they can go fast and haul lots of folks. And if you need to haul more people, build more helicopters. Seems to me aerotech is a solved problem.
War on the other hand, is not a solved problem. The US has the biggest godamned military in the world by a huge margin. How's that working out for us?
From a probability perspective, the Drake equations are crap. If there are 10 to the 29th stars in the universe, then that means in order for life to be unique in the universe, we need 29 events in a row with a 1 in 10 chance of occurring. If we're just trying to be unique in this here local galaxy of 100 billion stars, then we only needs 11 events in a row with a 1 in 10 chance of happening.
For all the folks who think Apple should write software to break a phone used by terrorists in America, ask yourself how you'd feel about China asking Apple to help track down one of their local terrorists. China is as legal a government as the USA's is.
Why weren't they forced to do this for the Silk Road case?
Silk Road's ip address was discovered thru examining a bunch of on-line records, as was the email identity of the founder. No hack was involved. Once they had a target, social hacking occurred.
From the government's pov, the debate is between the user of the phone and the owner. Fareed the mental case "terrorist" locked the phone but the owner is the county organization he worked for. They paid for the phone and the account and they are fully onboard with finding out what their employee used it for.
That's not quite the same as a citizen's right against the govt.
Forcing Apple to write some sw that doesn't exist seems onerous to me even in this case.
But employers may think different about buying iPhones for their employees now.
quite the interesting conundrum.
Yeah, and 1984 was supposed to be a cautionary tale for the public, not an instruction manual for the psychopaths running things.
The same thing can be said of Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince". And look how that turned out.
And to be honest, Orwell wasn't looking into the future. He was looking at post war England
He wanted to title the book 1948.
Read Burgess' 1985
I'm usually totally sincere when being sarcastic. Seriously.