There are a number of things the Canadian government wants to "negotiate away" at these talks. We have market quotas for chicken and milk that cost consumers millions but have been politically impossible to remove. The Canadian government would love to give these away as concessions for something. There are probably some US politicians that would like to make "concessions" on some stupid American law that is politically difficult to remove. Canada can't be the only country with dumb laws for rich special interest groups.
The false positive is guaranteed if my sample size is large enough. If I test for 20 markers that have 2 values each, and I test 1 million people I will likely find a match to you. (More if the distribution of each marker isn't 50/50).
However if you have a known sample of the perpetrator (say a semen sample), and the DNA doesn't match then you are pretty much 100% sure the suspect is innocent.
Originally patents were not intended to spur innovation, engineers will always innovate, but to encourage inventors to share their ideas. This was so that we as society would not have to reinvent things over and over. This made sense 500 years ago when a research was minimal and often inventions involved luck and chance. Many societies forgot how to do things. If a good engineer can't invent the same thing that is in a patient in a months worth of work then your invention isn't innovative. 99% of all software patients are the obvious solution to the first person who sees the problem. It gets worse, since most patients are shit (I can't even read the ones my name is on), no one ever reads them. So the inventors aren't truly sharing their idea with the world because getting a patient is essentially hiding an idea in a huge pile of shit. If we want to keep patients then they should be things that are so truly innovative that I will want to read about them in a trade journal.
There is one special type of patient that some of you will argue for, that is for drug patents. However the huge cost of drugs is not the cost of research but because of the broken certification and marketing processes. A better way to find new drugs would have health providers pool their money and do their own research. That would mean in most countries the government would pay for not just the pure research but also the testing and certification.
Last point. At the moment, if someone does invent something new, useful and that isn't obvious from the finished product, they don't patent it. Look at how many manufacturing processes that are trade secrets. This is actually the area that England first introduced patents to avoid.
I've met 3 programmers I know are worth a million a year. Some positions have a multiplier effect being 10% better than the next guy might be worth 10 million to a company. They are producing code that will run on hundreds of computers and potentially control billions in assets. It seems surprising that some good programmers are not making that same money as sports or movie stars. (OK - some in finance are making that money but I don't count that)
Ah, thank you. That does make sense. That would also explain what other wise would be really bizarre budget spending requirements. If most Americans approve of that arrangement then I'm not going to criticize.
Democracy is the best way for people to remove a government peacefully. I do realize that in the USA that's generally not possible, American's can only vote for "the other lizard", you can't actually remove both. However, in almost every other place in the world such gross mismanagement of the economy would lead to at least a viable opposition being created. What is so special about the USA when their government (i.e. congress) regularly has support in the low teens. The government of Syria has more support and they have to use violent suppression to stay in power.
I've lived in the USA both in the Bay area and in a wealthy part of black Decatur Georgia. I like Americans. I really don't understand their support for their government.
Imagine driving during the day and entering a dark tunnel with these on. When you do it with sun glasses on you immediately rip them off so you don't crash. There are other less extreme high contrast situations where these might turn dark when you want to see in the shadows. I can't see how these would be allowed for safety reasons.
It comes down to your employers level of control. Uber gives you the work but that's about it. People may do it full time but that doesn't make you an employee and as much as you might want the benefits that are mandated for employees wanting something doesn't make it true. Think of it another way. When you take a job with a company, you are giving something else up, usually it's your ability to to set your schedule and work for someone else. You aren't forced to give anything up to work for Uber. You aren't "sticky". Compare this to a school teacher, who has to train and specialize. When they get a job they are committed to being a teacher and often there is only one school teacher employer in an area. They are both committed to that employer and in a very weak bargaining position as an individual. That's why we have labour laws protecting them and also allow them to form unions. (The balance of power is likely way to far in their favour now but that's another story).
TPP with the USA in it was an awful agreement that had all kinds of harsh copyright nonsense. Most of it got scrapped when the USA pulled out. There is no way in hell it will go back in and that's good for Canadians and Americans. His trade war threats have forced us to seriously consider diversifying our exports and his general demeanor has led to an influx of talent into Canadian companies. I'm hoping his lack of focus on anything has meant that other countries in the Americas can adopt more sane drug laws. Despite all his chest beating he actually hasn't gotten America involved in any new wars. That's thousands of young men and women that can vacation in Canada and buy our goods.
Use CO2 with sunlight and water to grow useful plants.
Crazy idea right?
Stupid idea. Think about it. Where are you going to grow the plants that doesn't already have plants growing there. Next what do you do with the plants when you are done? If you let them rot you release the carbon as, C02, CH4 and other gases which are worse. You could convert the plants to fuel but, as we see in ethanol production that takes so much other energy that it might actually be worse. Forests aren't even a good carbon sink (despite what the government of Canada claims). Basically a mature forest is going to reach a carbon equilibrium. It's not like mature forests have kilometers of carbon they have deposited in the soil. It's more like an increase in the top meter.
I think we all knew this could be done in theory but someone actually went out and tried it and measured what the results were. They even came up with data rates. It should be noted also that they could still read the data above other noise on the power line. They used frequency shift keying to encode their data so that noise from some devices could be easily filtered out. Big things like a water heater or stove can be filtered out by amplitude, inductive things like air compressors or pool pumps are also easy to filter out, it's small things in the 30watt range that are switching on and off that would be a problem but there aren't many things like that.
This threat is down on my list of things to worry about to the same level as being hit by a meteor but I still applaud Mordechai Guri for actually trying it and measuring the results.
They have some very impressive logistics and brand recognition but almost no barriers to others competing against them. AWS is amazing but there is very little that binds you to using them. aliexpress provides strong competition in their merchandise sales and shopify is changing the way online companies sell, threatening both of them. Amazon earns it sales every quarter and lots of people want those sales. I can see the justification for the high R&D budget.
The certification for a drug is paid for by the company that wants to manufacture the drug. This creates a huge conflict of interest in those doing the testing of the drug. To mitigate this we add more and more layers of regulation. The regulators though have a conflict of interest. They will rarely be punished for not approving something or for being overly cautious. So the regulation becomes so bloated and slow that actually filling the paperwork for certification becomes a significant cost.
A better approach would be to have the original research publicly funded (which it usually is), then have the national/state/provincial health care providers (or in the US the hospitals and health insurance companies) pay for the certification. We would have to get rid of drug patents and have some sort of international policy to encourage each country to pay a certain percent of their health care budget towards identifying and certifying new drugs. With the right incentives I'm sure we could come up with a system far better than what we have today.
The point of washing your isn't to kill germs. It's to get rid of the places harmful bacteria can live in and multiply in. This applies to not just your hands but hospital floors, walls and hell almost everything. Bacteria are everywhere. If you bleached everything but don't actually remove the stuff the bacteria thrive on, they will be back. If you use anti bacterial hand wash you are really just giving the harmful bacteria an advantage over the good bacteria on your skin. So wash, actually clean and call out your hospital on all the ick and bodily fluids that they just spray with disinfectant.
I hate whenever a term is considered a "right". You right to be forgotten has to be balanced with my right to know what criminal shit you did. And if you were convicted of a crime you better have a very good reason why your right is more important than mine. Excluding criminal acts this whole exercise of being forgotten sickens me. We all do stupid things and say even worse, at least those of us who have ever actually done something in our lives. Most people who want to punish people for what they find online are punishing them for it being public not for what they have done. I honestly don't care if there happen to be pictures of my girlfriend naked on the internet, or something a coworker has posted in a comment section and later regretted.
However, by putting so much emphasis on deleting these things we add to the shame of the original act. Everyone should say what you are thinking, post a picture of yourself naked, then when it is so common then no one will actually care. If you want my opinion on something, ask me and have a civilized conversation about it.
The cost of the fab plants has also been growing exponentially. It hasn't been doubling every 18 months and we (consumers) haven't noticed because the cost of the fabs has been spread out over more chips being made. Unfortunately more and more manufacturers are now fabless. Meaning the actual manufacturing is more concentrated. However the bigger thing we should worry about is the end of exponential grow of chip demand. When that happens it won't just be an engineering problem to pack more transistors in but to do so economically. That will be the end of Moore's Law (prediction). I don't see that bloat of software ending anytime soon.
Monero has several functions to create anonymity, each one on it's own doesn't do it but combined there is a nice proof that they do. Every 6 months some idiot points out that one of the functions can be beaten. It's so common I'm not even going to bother reading the paper this time.
This has been going on for as long as there have been anti discrimination laws. Credit companies are probably the worst. They buy lists of demographic details by zip or postal code and then only send out offers to those groups they want as customers. Facebook makes it easier do chose your audience and they also make it much more obvious when a company does discriminate. There should have been stronger laws about this kind of discrimination long ago.
AI will certainly make better and cheaper products for someone in Africa but what will the guy in Africa have to offer in exchange? AI will make most labor almost worthless. Right now a poor country can compete with low wages but if if a robot costs 1M dollars and can do the work in the USA of 2000 unskilled workers, even if the workers in Africa work for free, the transportation and logistics costs might make the robot more cost effective. The worry is, when this happens a country can't use cheap labor to boot strap its way up.
Almost everything in Android is open source or was. The barrier to entry for is not that large that another company can't fork what is already out there and create a smart phone. Google is just asserting
1) that if you want to call something Android you have to pass their tests
2) if you want to run some of their apps, those apps expect to run in an environment that passed the Android certification
At this point it is more about quality control and user experience than it is creating a walled garden. I'm sure you can create a fork that is even better than Android but unless Google has tested that it's at least as good as some minimum standard you can't call it Android. I don't see how this is a big deal.
Human drivers will kill about 100 people in the USA today, world wide it will be close to 2000. Driving also consumes the valuable resource of 4.5 million workers in the USA alone.
Uber might be an easy company for some people to hate (and there are even some people with financial incentive to hate them) but other than the slashdot hate for crypto currencies this is excessive. They also might have the worst self driving car on the road but someone has to be the worst*. We need self driving vehicles and there are going to be accidents. If lax standards means killing 10000 people so that self driving cars that have 50% less fatalities are on the road one month sooner then we have a net saving of 50 000 people. So everyone calling Uber murderers, for them to stop testing and for more stringent controls on self driving cars, statistically you are significantly worse than them. While your at it why don't you donate to Green Peace so they can protect big coal and rail delivery of crude oil?Poor math and critical thinking are what will doom the human race.
*What do you call the person who graduates last in medschool? --------- Doctor.
My kids' school has a locked front door and a fence around the school yard. They claim it's to prevent a kid being abducted but they will eventually open the door to everyone. So the extra security worthless, is a total pain and worse it means I have to walk my kids the long way round the parking lot. I'm in Canada. We average less than one abduction by a complete stranger every 3 years of a child not on a native reserve. It is so rare most Canadians know who Paul_Bernardo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... is. Contrast that risk with the risk of my kids being hit in the parking lot. It's thousands a year with about 20 fatalities of small children.
This is a school where they should be good at math. The risks to small children are childhood leukemia and traffic accidents. As they get older its meningitis, traffic accidents and suicide. How about we spend 1/10 of the money we spend on Hollywood threats on real threats to my kids?
It has now reached the point were I feel guilty paying for a ticket knowing that some of that money goes to the MPAA. I know democracy is weak in the USA but I'm still saddened when I see a new exploit of the corrupt system they have.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a number of things the Canadian government wants to "negotiate away" at these talks. We have market quotas for chicken and milk that cost consumers millions but have been politically impossible to remove. The Canadian government would love to give these away as concessions for something. There are probably some US politicians that would like to make "concessions" on some stupid American law that is politically difficult to remove. Canada can't be the only country with dumb laws for rich special interest groups.
The false positive is guaranteed if my sample size is large enough. If I test for 20 markers that have 2 values each, and I test 1 million people I will likely find a match to you. (More if the distribution of each marker isn't 50/50).
However if you have a known sample of the perpetrator (say a semen sample), and the DNA doesn't match then you are pretty much 100% sure the suspect is innocent.
Originally patents were not intended to spur innovation, engineers will always innovate, but to encourage inventors to share their ideas. This was so that we as society would not have to reinvent things over and over. This made sense 500 years ago when a research was minimal and often inventions involved luck and chance. Many societies forgot how to do things. If a good engineer can't invent the same thing that is in a patient in a months worth of work then your invention isn't innovative. 99% of all software patients are the obvious solution to the first person who sees the problem. It gets worse, since most patients are shit (I can't even read the ones my name is on), no one ever reads them. So the inventors aren't truly sharing their idea with the world because getting a patient is essentially hiding an idea in a huge pile of shit. If we want to keep patients then they should be things that are so truly innovative that I will want to read about them in a trade journal.
There is one special type of patient that some of you will argue for, that is for drug patents. However the huge cost of drugs is not the cost of research but because of the broken certification and marketing processes. A better way to find new drugs would have health providers pool their money and do their own research. That would mean in most countries the government would pay for not just the pure research but also the testing and certification.
Last point. At the moment, if someone does invent something new, useful and that isn't obvious from the finished product, they don't patent it. Look at how many manufacturing processes that are trade secrets. This is actually the area that England first introduced patents to avoid.
I've met 3 programmers I know are worth a million a year. Some positions have a multiplier effect being 10% better than the next guy might be worth 10 million to a company. They are producing code that will run on hundreds of computers and potentially control billions in assets. It seems surprising that some good programmers are not making that same money as sports or movie stars. (OK - some in finance are making that money but I don't count that)
Ah, thank you. That does make sense. That would also explain what other wise would be really bizarre budget spending requirements. If most Americans approve of that arrangement then I'm not going to criticize.
Democracy is the best way for people to remove a government peacefully. I do realize that in the USA that's generally not possible, American's can only vote for "the other lizard", you can't actually remove both. However, in almost every other place in the world such gross mismanagement of the economy would lead to at least a viable opposition being created. What is so special about the USA when their government (i.e. congress) regularly has support in the low teens. The government of Syria has more support and they have to use violent suppression to stay in power.
I've lived in the USA both in the Bay area and in a wealthy part of black Decatur Georgia. I like Americans. I really don't understand their support for their government.
Imagine driving during the day and entering a dark tunnel with these on. When you do it with sun glasses on you immediately rip them off so you don't crash. There are other less extreme high contrast situations where these might turn dark when you want to see in the shadows. I can't see how these would be allowed for safety reasons.
It comes down to your employers level of control. Uber gives you the work but that's about it. People may do it full time but that doesn't make you an employee and as much as you might want the benefits that are mandated for employees wanting something doesn't make it true. Think of it another way. When you take a job with a company, you are giving something else up, usually it's your ability to to set your schedule and work for someone else. You aren't forced to give anything up to work for Uber. You aren't "sticky". Compare this to a school teacher, who has to train and specialize. When they get a job they are committed to being a teacher and often there is only one school teacher employer in an area. They are both committed to that employer and in a very weak bargaining position as an individual. That's why we have labour laws protecting them and also allow them to form unions. (The balance of power is likely way to far in their favour now but that's another story).
TPP with the USA in it was an awful agreement that had all kinds of harsh copyright nonsense. Most of it got scrapped when the USA pulled out. There is no way in hell it will go back in and that's good for Canadians and Americans. His trade war threats have forced us to seriously consider diversifying our exports and his general demeanor has led to an influx of talent into Canadian companies. I'm hoping his lack of focus on anything has meant that other countries in the Americas can adopt more sane drug laws. Despite all his chest beating he actually hasn't gotten America involved in any new wars. That's thousands of young men and women that can vacation in Canada and buy our goods.
Use CO2 with sunlight and water to grow useful plants.
Crazy idea right?
Stupid idea. Think about it. Where are you going to grow the plants that doesn't already have plants growing there. Next what do you do with the plants when you are done? If you let them rot you release the carbon as, C02, CH4 and other gases which are worse. You could convert the plants to fuel but, as we see in ethanol production that takes so much other energy that it might actually be worse. Forests aren't even a good carbon sink (despite what the government of Canada claims). Basically a mature forest is going to reach a carbon equilibrium. It's not like mature forests have kilometers of carbon they have deposited in the soil. It's more like an increase in the top meter.
I think we all knew this could be done in theory but someone actually went out and tried it and measured what the results were. They even came up with data rates. It should be noted also that they could still read the data above other noise on the power line. They used frequency shift keying to encode their data so that noise from some devices could be easily filtered out. Big things like a water heater or stove can be filtered out by amplitude, inductive things like air compressors or pool pumps are also easy to filter out, it's small things in the 30watt range that are switching on and off that would be a problem but there aren't many things like that.
This threat is down on my list of things to worry about to the same level as being hit by a meteor but I still applaud Mordechai Guri for actually trying it and measuring the results.
They have some very impressive logistics and brand recognition but almost no barriers to others competing against them. AWS is amazing but there is very little that binds you to using them. aliexpress provides strong competition in their merchandise sales and shopify is changing the way online companies sell, threatening both of them. Amazon earns it sales every quarter and lots of people want those sales. I can see the justification for the high R&D budget.
The certification for a drug is paid for by the company that wants to manufacture the drug. This creates a huge conflict of interest in those doing the testing of the drug. To mitigate this we add more and more layers of regulation. The regulators though have a conflict of interest. They will rarely be punished for not approving something or for being overly cautious. So the regulation becomes so bloated and slow that actually filling the paperwork for certification becomes a significant cost.
A better approach would be to have the original research publicly funded (which it usually is), then have the national/state/provincial health care providers (or in the US the hospitals and health insurance companies) pay for the certification. We would have to get rid of drug patents and have some sort of international policy to encourage each country to pay a certain percent of their health care budget towards identifying and certifying new drugs. With the right incentives I'm sure we could come up with a system far better than what we have today.
The point of washing your isn't to kill germs. It's to get rid of the places harmful bacteria can live in and multiply in. This applies to not just your hands but hospital floors, walls and hell almost everything. Bacteria are everywhere. If you bleached everything but don't actually remove the stuff the bacteria thrive on, they will be back. If you use anti bacterial hand wash you are really just giving the harmful bacteria an advantage over the good bacteria on your skin. So wash, actually clean and call out your hospital on all the ick and bodily fluids that they just spray with disinfectant.
I hate whenever a term is considered a "right". You right to be forgotten has to be balanced with my right to know what criminal shit you did. And if you were convicted of a crime you better have a very good reason why your right is more important than mine. Excluding criminal acts this whole exercise of being forgotten sickens me. We all do stupid things and say even worse, at least those of us who have ever actually done something in our lives. Most people who want to punish people for what they find online are punishing them for it being public not for what they have done. I honestly don't care if there happen to be pictures of my girlfriend naked on the internet, or something a coworker has posted in a comment section and later regretted.
However, by putting so much emphasis on deleting these things we add to the shame of the original act. Everyone should say what you are thinking, post a picture of yourself naked, then when it is so common then no one will actually care. If you want my opinion on something, ask me and have a civilized conversation about it.
The cost of the fab plants has also been growing exponentially. It hasn't been doubling every 18 months and we (consumers) haven't noticed because the cost of the fabs has been spread out over more chips being made. Unfortunately more and more manufacturers are now fabless. Meaning the actual manufacturing is more concentrated. However the bigger thing we should worry about is the end of exponential grow of chip demand. When that happens it won't just be an engineering problem to pack more transistors in but to do so economically. That will be the end of Moore's Law (prediction). I don't see that bloat of software ending anytime soon.
Monero has several functions to create anonymity, each one on it's own doesn't do it but combined there is a nice proof that they do. Every 6 months some idiot points out that one of the functions can be beaten. It's so common I'm not even going to bother reading the paper this time.
This has been going on for as long as there have been anti discrimination laws. Credit companies are probably the worst. They buy lists of demographic details by zip or postal code and then only send out offers to those groups they want as customers. Facebook makes it easier do chose your audience and they also make it much more obvious when a company does discriminate. There should have been stronger laws about this kind of discrimination long ago.
AI will certainly make better and cheaper products for someone in Africa but what will the guy in Africa have to offer in exchange? AI will make most labor almost worthless. Right now a poor country can compete with low wages but if if a robot costs 1M dollars and can do the work in the USA of 2000 unskilled workers, even if the workers in Africa work for free, the transportation and logistics costs might make the robot more cost effective. The worry is, when this happens a country can't use cheap labor to boot strap its way up.
Almost everything in Android is open source or was. The barrier to entry for is not that large that another company can't fork what is already out there and create a smart phone. Google is just asserting
1) that if you want to call something Android you have to pass their tests
2) if you want to run some of their apps, those apps expect to run in an environment that passed the Android certification
At this point it is more about quality control and user experience than it is creating a walled garden. I'm sure you can create a fork that is even better than Android but unless Google has tested that it's at least as good as some minimum standard you can't call it Android. I don't see how this is a big deal.
https://studentloans.net/finan...
Steam is what you get when you burn hydrogen containing molecules. Space X flies with CO2 and Steam.
Human drivers will kill about 100 people in the USA today, world wide it will be close to 2000. Driving also consumes the valuable resource of 4.5 million workers in the USA alone.
Uber might be an easy company for some people to hate (and there are even some people with financial incentive to hate them) but other than the slashdot hate for crypto currencies this is excessive. They also might have the worst self driving car on the road but someone has to be the worst*. We need self driving vehicles and there are going to be accidents. If lax standards means killing 10000 people so that self driving cars that have 50% less fatalities are on the road one month sooner then we have a net saving of 50 000 people. So everyone calling Uber murderers, for them to stop testing and for more stringent controls on self driving cars, statistically you are significantly worse than them. While your at it why don't you donate to Green Peace so they can protect big coal and rail delivery of crude oil?Poor math and critical thinking are what will doom the human race.
*What do you call the person who graduates last in medschool? --------- Doctor.
My kids' school has a locked front door and a fence around the school yard. They claim it's to prevent a kid being abducted but they will eventually open the door to everyone. So the extra security worthless, is a total pain and worse it means I have to walk my kids the long way round the parking lot. I'm in Canada. We average less than one abduction by a complete stranger every 3 years of a child not on a native reserve. It is so rare most Canadians know who Paul_Bernardo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... is. Contrast that risk with the risk of my kids being hit in the parking lot. It's thousands a year with about 20 fatalities of small children.
This is a school where they should be good at math. The risks to small children are childhood leukemia and traffic accidents. As they get older its meningitis, traffic accidents and suicide. How about we spend 1/10 of the money we spend on Hollywood threats on real threats to my kids?
It has now reached the point were I feel guilty paying for a ticket knowing that some of that money goes to the MPAA. I know democracy is weak in the USA but I'm still saddened when I see a new exploit of the corrupt system they have.