My money is on the fact that Russia thought they could embarrass NATO by foiling their exercise with a simple GPS jammer... they then sheepishly shrugged their shoulders when it didn't work.
Unfortunately Disney is going to milk this for every penny they can... be prepared for another spiderman reboot... and perhaps a hulk reboot too... for good measure, gotta sell those toys you know.
I think you misunderstood a few things. On my first point I said there is no INTEGRATION with source control. In Visual Studio, you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Eclipse, you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Pycharm you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Jupyter you can not (at least I'm not aware of how).
On your second comment, there are many ways to test that the code compiles and runs correctly, but that will not guarantee that it is right. I, like you, tend to frequently reset the kernel to ensure everything is good, but my concern isn't for me so much as it is for a group of scientists, who are scientists first, and data scientists second, and in some cases data scientists first, but computer scientists second. I'd love to see a build server and unit test capability in Jupyter, but I know I'm reaching on that one... asking data scientists to write using object oriented principles and unit tests is akin to asking them to write poetry in greek.
On the third point, it is again, an area that I don't have an issue with so much as it is an area that a group of data scientists has an issue with. If I want to promote rapid deployment of data science packages to the organization, I need an easier way to move code from spitball POC to enterprise-ready, load tested, environmentally robust code. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've seen people try to deploy code to a server, only to enter into dependency hell because project A wants a package that is incompatible with project B. Now I've got to circle back and containerize all these piddly applications, and once that's done, I don't have a way to push the containers back to maintainers (because they're scientists dammit! They don't have time to learn about containers!). There aren't enough hours left in my life (and I'm not THAT old) to do all of this myself. I need as many people as possible to up their game doing data science to make any real progress. That means taking content matter experts, and training them with data science skills. Because that's way easier than taking someone with data science skills and teaching them the subject matter. That means I need a development environment that is easy enough for them, and also provides enterprise software development capability.
Anyway, I guess all I'm saying is that I pray for the day that this ecosystem is as mature as the ones I'm coming from because a lot of the problems that have long been solved in computer science are now being repeated. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
For the past year, I've begun using Jupyter and although I like it, there are some features that really bother me, and worry me when it comes time to create reproducible science. 1) Jupyter doesn't integrate automatically with any kind of source control software, and in the circles I run in, it is largely ignored. Data scientists act like they've never heard of source control, and what makes it worse, my local university is pumping out student after student where they introduce them to data science with Jupyter, but never bring up the topic of coding standards and recoverability. 2) Jupyter allows you to execute cells out of order. While this definitely helps speed up development (when you make a mistake, and just want to fix the relevant line and continue, rather than re-loading your entire data set), it presents a unique risk when someone thinks they've discovered something amazing, only to be unable to reproduce it after a restart, or when sharing the notebook with someone else. This can happen when race conditions exist, or when code makes changes to the database, and your out of order execution causes spooky behavior. 3) Jupyter doesn't encourage enterprise deployment. Too often I see experimental data science done well, but due to the nature of rapid development, nothing is modular, nothing is object oriented, and so if the solution was a one off answer, everything is great, but if the solution is to be made into proper enterprise ready code, the entire notebook must be transcribed into truly disciplined code. (as an aside, this process is massively difficult because data scientists often don't understand the principles of object oriented programming, and the programmer doesn't understand the principles specific to the data science objective the code was written to solve.)
I expect to use Jupyter a lot more frequently in the coming years, but I fear it will feel like a huge step back in terms of the things that computer scientists have solved, that data scientists are ignoring.
Arguing that residents of Austin should be "off grid" in the middle of a giant metropolis? Sounds dubious. It would cost the residents of Austin less money to invest in making their grid more robust, rather than expecting each and every one of them to be entirely self sufficient. Again, economies of scale dominate this issue.
Being off grid in a largely rural area is definitely a realistic argument, but being off grid in the center of a giant city is a great way to "spend" your money.
The answer lies in the phrase "economies of scale." There is almost NOTHING that you can do in your home, and have it be more efficient than the industrial version of the same. From baking bread to energy storage... industry has you beat. Solar power, wind power, battery storage, compressed air storage, geothermal... the list just keeps going... This is why as much as I love solar, I'll probably never have it on my house. The industry will find a way to do it better than I can, and I'm OK with that. Healthcare realized this fact decades ago.
That doesn't sound like common sense... Imagine an adult that had dropped out of school at a young age... they may not be able to answer the given question. Knowing that plants produce oxygen is something learned. I would put common sense more in the realm of: if you spit in someone's face, will they: a) hug you, b) get angry, c) eat a sandwich? Common sense is sense acquired through common experience, not schooling.
I'm curious, is it possible for a capsule to perform a mission profile such as the Hubble repairs that the STS performed? What missions will never be attempted, because a capsule is simply not fit for that kind of mission? The shuttle did some amazing stuff, but if I had to choose, I think I'd rather have the crews of the Columbia and Challenger back rather than have the Hubble repaired. Perhaps it would have been better to build and launch a second Hubble, and keep using capsules?
This sounds just awful. Alexa is going to pimp cough drops to me all day long, despite the fact that I already have two bags of them sitting in the cabinet? Or the fact that I've already got a case of chicken soup in the pantry? If I'm vegan, is Alexa still going to pimp the chicken soup, or is it going to push some BS homeopathic remedy instead? I just don't get paying large sums of money to get a device that just peppers me with ads.
I did... perhaps my comment was too subtle. I meant to imply that they already know full what your phone number is... they're asking so they can maintain the illusion of privacy while they add protection (for what it's worth) to your account. Or stated another way, they maintain the illusion of privacy while adding the illusion of security. Thus, the only reason to ask you that question, is in fact to add two factor security, and could just as easily been done by asking "do you want to protect your account with your phone "
Wow... so many people misread my comment. They keep it compartmentalized from YOU. They know your phone number, so the most convenient user interface design would be to simply ask "do you want to secure your account with your phone number " and not even bother asking you to type it in. They let you type it in to maintain the appearance that they don't really know all that much about you.
Wow... are you leading with an insult to distract from your ignorance, or is this how you start every conversation? They keep it compartmentalized, because some of what they are doing is illegal! And it undermines their business model if the law is changed to make more of what they do illegal. If they simply started using your phone number (which they already have) to secure your account, then people would realize how much Facebook knows about them, and then pressure would increase on politicians to protect user data more. By the way, they keep it compartmentalized from YOU, not internally, I'm sure that for high paying advertisers, it's a full orgy of intermingled user data.
I haven't had a Facebook account for years... this morning after reading the story about the Founder of WhatsApp, and a few days ago reading the articles from the founders of Instagram, I decided to delete my Instagram and WhatsApp accounts as well. The thing that disturbed me was that Instagram kept prompting me to follow users, claiming they were in my contacts list... but I had NEVER given Instagram permission to my contact list... so how did they know? Too creepy for me. I'm out. Instagram was a giant time suck anyway.
It's interesting to me that you believe they don't already have it. I genuinely believe that they're asking for your number so they can help protect your account... which said data is kept separate and compartmentalized from the data they know about you for advertising purposes.
Require companies that intend to collect ANY personal data to put up a bond commensurate with the type of data they collect. If they are found to have sold the data, or allowed through negligence the data to be stolen, then the bond immediately pays out to the effected people, without so much as a whisper from a lawyer.
I know that's all a fantasy, but really these companies need to know that they can't treat people like assets.
Slashdot Mirror
My money is on the fact that Russia thought they could embarrass NATO by foiling their exercise with a simple GPS jammer... they then sheepishly shrugged their shoulders when it didn't work.
Unfortunately Disney is going to milk this for every penny they can... be prepared for another spiderman reboot... and perhaps a hulk reboot too... for good measure, gotta sell those toys you know.
Just like they're forced to use taxis now?
I think you misunderstood a few things. On my first point I said there is no INTEGRATION with source control. In Visual Studio, you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Eclipse, you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Pycharm you can commit and check out directly in your IDE. In Jupyter you can not (at least I'm not aware of how).
On your second comment, there are many ways to test that the code compiles and runs correctly, but that will not guarantee that it is right. I, like you, tend to frequently reset the kernel to ensure everything is good, but my concern isn't for me so much as it is for a group of scientists, who are scientists first, and data scientists second, and in some cases data scientists first, but computer scientists second. I'd love to see a build server and unit test capability in Jupyter, but I know I'm reaching on that one... asking data scientists to write using object oriented principles and unit tests is akin to asking them to write poetry in greek.
On the third point, it is again, an area that I don't have an issue with so much as it is an area that a group of data scientists has an issue with. If I want to promote rapid deployment of data science packages to the organization, I need an easier way to move code from spitball POC to enterprise-ready, load tested, environmentally robust code. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've seen people try to deploy code to a server, only to enter into dependency hell because project A wants a package that is incompatible with project B. Now I've got to circle back and containerize all these piddly applications, and once that's done, I don't have a way to push the containers back to maintainers (because they're scientists dammit! They don't have time to learn about containers!). There aren't enough hours left in my life (and I'm not THAT old) to do all of this myself. I need as many people as possible to up their game doing data science to make any real progress. That means taking content matter experts, and training them with data science skills. Because that's way easier than taking someone with data science skills and teaching them the subject matter. That means I need a development environment that is easy enough for them, and also provides enterprise software development capability.
Anyway, I guess all I'm saying is that I pray for the day that this ecosystem is as mature as the ones I'm coming from because a lot of the problems that have long been solved in computer science are now being repeated. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
For the past year, I've begun using Jupyter and although I like it, there are some features that really bother me, and worry me when it comes time to create reproducible science. 1) Jupyter doesn't integrate automatically with any kind of source control software, and in the circles I run in, it is largely ignored. Data scientists act like they've never heard of source control, and what makes it worse, my local university is pumping out student after student where they introduce them to data science with Jupyter, but never bring up the topic of coding standards and recoverability. 2) Jupyter allows you to execute cells out of order. While this definitely helps speed up development (when you make a mistake, and just want to fix the relevant line and continue, rather than re-loading your entire data set), it presents a unique risk when someone thinks they've discovered something amazing, only to be unable to reproduce it after a restart, or when sharing the notebook with someone else. This can happen when race conditions exist, or when code makes changes to the database, and your out of order execution causes spooky behavior. 3) Jupyter doesn't encourage enterprise deployment. Too often I see experimental data science done well, but due to the nature of rapid development, nothing is modular, nothing is object oriented, and so if the solution was a one off answer, everything is great, but if the solution is to be made into proper enterprise ready code, the entire notebook must be transcribed into truly disciplined code. (as an aside, this process is massively difficult because data scientists often don't understand the principles of object oriented programming, and the programmer doesn't understand the principles specific to the data science objective the code was written to solve.)
I expect to use Jupyter a lot more frequently in the coming years, but I fear it will feel like a huge step back in terms of the things that computer scientists have solved, that data scientists are ignoring.
Arguing that residents of Austin should be "off grid" in the middle of a giant metropolis? Sounds dubious. It would cost the residents of Austin less money to invest in making their grid more robust, rather than expecting each and every one of them to be entirely self sufficient. Again, economies of scale dominate this issue.
Being off grid in a largely rural area is definitely a realistic argument, but being off grid in the center of a giant city is a great way to "spend" your money.
For some reason my brain translated that to Marilyn Manson. That image is still burned into my psyche.
The answer lies in the phrase "economies of scale." There is almost NOTHING that you can do in your home, and have it be more efficient than the industrial version of the same. From baking bread to energy storage... industry has you beat. Solar power, wind power, battery storage, compressed air storage, geothermal... the list just keeps going... This is why as much as I love solar, I'll probably never have it on my house. The industry will find a way to do it better than I can, and I'm OK with that. Healthcare realized this fact decades ago.
This reminds me of a quote:
“If our brains were simple enough for us to understand them, we'd be so simple that we couldn't.”
- Ian Stewart
Please, can we get some better publishers... this story is a lame repost.
...Can we stop calling them set-top-boxes... I can hardly balance a Bic pen on the top of my TV, let alone any kind of electronic device.
Also, this is stupid... nobody wants more Facebook in their lives.
That doesn't sound like common sense... Imagine an adult that had dropped out of school at a young age... they may not be able to answer the given question. Knowing that plants produce oxygen is something learned. I would put common sense more in the realm of: if you spit in someone's face, will they: a) hug you, b) get angry, c) eat a sandwich? Common sense is sense acquired through common experience, not schooling.
I know right? I constantly hope someone cares enough... to be watching... please?
I wonder if the American drilled a hole in something.
I'm curious, is it possible for a capsule to perform a mission profile such as the Hubble repairs that the STS performed? What missions will never be attempted, because a capsule is simply not fit for that kind of mission? The shuttle did some amazing stuff, but if I had to choose, I think I'd rather have the crews of the Columbia and Challenger back rather than have the Hubble repaired. Perhaps it would have been better to build and launch a second Hubble, and keep using capsules?
almost as delicious as the headline "New Tron Star Not Dense" I slow clapped that one.
Train algorithm with data in hand, algorithm's output mirrors data provided. They can't possibly be shocked by this, can they?
This sounds just awful. Alexa is going to pimp cough drops to me all day long, despite the fact that I already have two bags of them sitting in the cabinet? Or the fact that I've already got a case of chicken soup in the pantry? If I'm vegan, is Alexa still going to pimp the chicken soup, or is it going to push some BS homeopathic remedy instead? I just don't get paying large sums of money to get a device that just peppers me with ads.
I did... perhaps my comment was too subtle. I meant to imply that they already know full what your phone number is... they're asking so they can maintain the illusion of privacy while they add protection (for what it's worth) to your account. Or stated another way, they maintain the illusion of privacy while adding the illusion of security. Thus, the only reason to ask you that question, is in fact to add two factor security, and could just as easily been done by asking "do you want to protect your account with your phone "
Wow... so many people misread my comment. They keep it compartmentalized from YOU. They know your phone number, so the most convenient user interface design would be to simply ask "do you want to secure your account with your phone number " and not even bother asking you to type it in. They let you type it in to maintain the appearance that they don't really know all that much about you.
Wow... are you leading with an insult to distract from your ignorance, or is this how you start every conversation? They keep it compartmentalized, because some of what they are doing is illegal! And it undermines their business model if the law is changed to make more of what they do illegal. If they simply started using your phone number (which they already have) to secure your account, then people would realize how much Facebook knows about them, and then pressure would increase on politicians to protect user data more. By the way, they keep it compartmentalized from YOU, not internally, I'm sure that for high paying advertisers, it's a full orgy of intermingled user data.
Lol... somebody +1 this guy's post!
I haven't had a Facebook account for years... this morning after reading the story about the Founder of WhatsApp, and a few days ago reading the articles from the founders of Instagram, I decided to delete my Instagram and WhatsApp accounts as well. The thing that disturbed me was that Instagram kept prompting me to follow users, claiming they were in my contacts list... but I had NEVER given Instagram permission to my contact list... so how did they know? Too creepy for me. I'm out. Instagram was a giant time suck anyway.
It's interesting to me that you believe they don't already have it. I genuinely believe that they're asking for your number so they can help protect your account... which said data is kept separate and compartmentalized from the data they know about you for advertising purposes.
Require companies that intend to collect ANY personal data to put up a bond commensurate with the type of data they collect. If they are found to have sold the data, or allowed through negligence the data to be stolen, then the bond immediately pays out to the effected people, without so much as a whisper from a lawyer.
I know that's all a fantasy, but really these companies need to know that they can't treat people like assets.