Yeah, but it could stand some serious improvement if only 11% of the major findings are replicable. Admittedly, that's 10.979% better than religion, 10.4% better than tradition, 6.7% better than polling and 8% better than pulling numbers out of my ass.
Obviously that can't be concluded from the evidence. What can be concluded is that biomedical researchers are liars. It makes me feel real confident about this new drug and the safety of my genetically engineered food.
In the big picture, we can know that this can only happen by fraud or sloppy science, because all these papers claim 90% of more confidence that the null hypothesis is false. Out of a sample size of 53 the odds of only 6 being verified if they're individually 90% likely to be right is vanishing small.
Like, 10^-40 small. It fucking can't happen unless the scientists are either liars or incompetents.
In fact, it's more likely that all of those papers, including the 6 with verified results, were complete fabrications than that more than a third of the authors weren't making shit up.
Seriously, if science is this bad generally, why even bother paying the least bit of attention to it?
As in ""Overall, about half of adult Facebook users, or 47 percent, 'ever' get news there," Pew said in its report. "That amounts to 30 percent of the population."
So if you see a news story on Facebook, once in a while, i.e. often enough to remember that you did it, ever, you're in the 30%. It's a deceptive summary.
The referenced article goes on to say, "Just 4 percent said Facebook is the most important way they get news"
That's correct. On a 1-stellar mass black hole, the tidal force across a human body at the event horizon would shredded well before you get to the event horizon. But on a supermassive black hole, no such thing would hapen.
Yeah, this is the President's baby. But the thing is he has a lot of babies. That's the trouble. At high levels of any organization, one is forced by the sheer volume of responsibilities to rely on subordinates and subordinates of subordinates and subordinates of subordinates of subordinates to (1) handle the situation (2) tell you what you need to know and (3) not tell you details that you don't need to know (because you've only got so much time).
When you're head of whole fucking country (and a big one at that), you're necessarily going to have a very abstracted understanding of the very many things the government is doing. Even the ones you're most interested in will still get a thin slice of your attention.
Yes, I agree this should have had more of his attention. But should the budget fight with the Republicans, the NSA scandal, the war in Afghanistan or negotiations with Iran over nukes have had less? How much trust should he put in the organizations under him and the information coming from them?
You're confused. The holy grail of capitalism isn't "the market." It's the accumulation of capital. Ask any capitalist if that isn't what he's trying to do.
Some corrections. The IRS wasn't targeting conservatives per se. It was targeting ALL political groups that were applying for tax exempt status under new absurd rules handed down from the (SCOTUS) Ivory Tower.
Healthcare enrollment website has massive problems, well yeah, I'm sure the President knew as much from press reports as the rest of us. But I'm guessing that his subordinates at several levels down the chain were minimizing the problem so what at the level of the people directly responsible for working on the problem looked like a total nightmare was regarded with decreasing severity at each level up the chain. Like this:
webmasters: Website is fucked. Needs basic redesign that will take months to fix. direct managers: Website has major problems. Some elements will need to be overhauled. middle managers: Website has significantly underperformed. Some changes will be needed before it performs as expected.... Deputy HHS Secretary in charge of project: Website is experiencing some customer difficulties. We are working on it but it might take a while. HHS Secretary: There have been some troubles with the website rollout. We're working on it. Should be fixed soon. President of the United States: ???
Who hasn't seen pretty much this same scenario play out in their own organizations?
The question is not whether the US is the "good guy." In international politics there aren't any "good guys." But there are things that countries need to know about what's going on in other countries.
Maybe. Or maybe it's just that they can't trivially crack SSL encryption. If they could record everything going to and from Lavabit and crack they keys in a few days, they might still decide that given the "flexibleness" of the FISA court, it was less trouble to just get the SSL key from Lavabit. Turns out that's not so.
And if they had done it quietly, they would still be in business
Until somebody finds out and they get sued into oblivion and a reputation for all involved that impedes all future efforts. With all the leaks going on the risk of being a weasel and pretending everything was fine was too great. By closing the founder gets to keep his shirt and his former employees don't have to pretend they never worked there if they want to find a job.
I think it's unlikely that anyone would be successful suing them for turning over data due to a court order. But you're right that the publicity generated could harm them.
With same day delivery, Amazon is looking to be the replacement for your local retailer. Or rather, to make it work, maybe what they really need to be is the delivery service for your local retailer. They find the best price they can get for the item you want from a local retailer and deliver it the same day. No need to stock anything at all.
Apex predators are an essential part of any ecosystem. When apex predators start failing that means the ecosystem is failing.
So it's basically just another metaphor that doesn't work for business. When a Great White Shark dies, that's bad for the ocean. When a Sumatran Tiger dies, that's bad for the jungle. When a sociopathic CEO fails, I don't give a shit.
Another way it doesn't apply is that the thing that is essential to the predator's survival is an animal that is totally destroyed when so used. Jeff Bezos is a businessman. The thing his business survives on is the fact that customers come to him with their business. He makes a margin on that business. the customer survives the transaction.
It is very un-predatory behavior.
Viewed at another level, you might say that his company is trying to take revenue away from competitors, and has an ambition to take all their business and thereby destroy them. Well fine, but that's not like what a predator does either. A predator tries to get its prey, but then it fills its belly and is satisfied and doesn't hunt for a while. It doesn't constantly invest energy in trying to expand its food supply. In fact, it invests no energy in that, beyond chasing competitors out of its territory. It never tries to increase its territory beyond what it needs to keep its belly full and its belly is not infinitely expansible.
So let's dispense with the bad metaphor. The behavior isn't predatory.
It's a distinctly human behavior: empire building.
2. Deliver all ads from those servers. 3. Evade taxes in every jurisdiction by declaring that all ad revenue is generated in FloatingAdServer1 through FloatingAdServer14. 4. Profit!
And if they had done it quietly, they would still be in business. Lavabit sabotaged their own business to make a stand. I think it's a foolish stand, because their business model was fundamentally flawed from a security standpoint: they had users' encryption keys.
If you want your data secure, you do not give anyone your keys, whether that person be a third party or the government. The government can make you give them your keys, but Lavabit can't. Why do they have anybody's keys?
Even 20 minutes is death to a person in cardiac arrest. If you think it could take that long to get an ambulance, better to drive, whether or not breaking traffic laws on the way.
A little more than you're paying to rent a car now, if you want to make a similar rent-by-the-day contract. If you want an automated cab ride, it would be less than we pay now for cab rides.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but it could stand some serious improvement if only 11% of the major findings are replicable. Admittedly, that's 10.979% better than religion, 10.4% better than tradition, 6.7% better than polling and 8% better than pulling numbers out of my ass.
Obviously that can't be concluded from the evidence. What can be concluded is that biomedical researchers are liars. It makes me feel real confident about this new drug and the safety of my genetically engineered food.
In the big picture, we can know that this can only happen by fraud or sloppy science, because all these papers claim 90% of more confidence that the null hypothesis is false. Out of a sample size of 53 the odds of only 6 being verified if they're individually 90% likely to be right is vanishing small.
Like, 10^-40 small. It fucking can't happen unless the scientists are either liars or incompetents.
In fact, it's more likely that all of those papers, including the 6 with verified results, were complete fabrications than that more than a third of the authors weren't making shit up.
Seriously, if science is this bad generally, why even bother paying the least bit of attention to it?
As in ""Overall, about half of adult Facebook users, or 47 percent, 'ever' get news there," Pew said in its report. "That amounts to 30 percent of the population."
So if you see a news story on Facebook, once in a while, i.e. often enough to remember that you did it, ever, you're in the 30%. It's a deceptive summary.
The referenced article goes on to say, "Just 4 percent said Facebook is the most important way they get news"
Carry on with your silliness.
That's correct. On a 1-stellar mass black hole, the tidal force across a human body at the event horizon would shredded well before you get to the event horizon. But on a supermassive black hole, no such thing would hapen.
If they own the means of production at which other people work, they're capitalists.
I don't expect to be able to browbeat them into stopping if that's what you mean.
Yeah, this is the President's baby. But the thing is he has a lot of babies. That's the trouble. At high levels of any organization, one is forced by the sheer volume of responsibilities to rely on subordinates and subordinates of subordinates and subordinates of subordinates of subordinates to (1) handle the situation (2) tell you what you need to know and (3) not tell you details that you don't need to know (because you've only got so much time).
When you're head of whole fucking country (and a big one at that), you're necessarily going to have a very abstracted understanding of the very many things the government is doing. Even the ones you're most interested in will still get a thin slice of your attention.
Yes, I agree this should have had more of his attention. But should the budget fight with the Republicans, the NSA scandal, the war in Afghanistan or negotiations with Iran over nukes have had less? How much trust should he put in the organizations under him and the information coming from them?
You're confused. The holy grail of capitalism isn't "the market." It's the accumulation of capital. Ask any capitalist if that isn't what he's trying to do.
Some corrections. The IRS wasn't targeting conservatives per se. It was targeting ALL political groups that were applying for tax exempt status under new absurd rules handed down from the (SCOTUS) Ivory Tower.
Healthcare enrollment website has massive problems, well yeah, I'm sure the President knew as much from press reports as the rest of us. But I'm guessing that his subordinates at several levels down the chain were minimizing the problem so what at the level of the people directly responsible for working on the problem looked like a total nightmare was regarded with decreasing severity at each level up the chain. Like this:
webmasters: Website is fucked. Needs basic redesign that will take months to fix. ...
direct managers: Website has major problems. Some elements will need to be overhauled.
middle managers: Website has significantly underperformed. Some changes will be needed before it performs as expected.
Deputy HHS Secretary in charge of project: Website is experiencing some customer difficulties. We are working on it but it might take a while.
HHS Secretary: There have been some troubles with the website rollout. We're working on it. Should be fixed soon.
President of the United States: ???
Who hasn't seen pretty much this same scenario play out in their own organizations?
The question is not whether the US is the "good guy." In international politics there aren't any "good guys." But there are things that countries need to know about what's going on in other countries.
Maybe. Or maybe it's just that they can't trivially crack SSL encryption. If they could record everything going to and from Lavabit and crack they keys in a few days, they might still decide that given the "flexibleness" of the FISA court, it was less trouble to just get the SSL key from Lavabit. Turns out that's not so.
Apparently it's also having trouble recognizing your [shift] key.
Try changing your posting settings.
Until somebody finds out and they get sued into oblivion and a reputation for all involved that impedes all future efforts. With all the leaks going on the risk of being a weasel and pretending everything was fine was too great. By closing the founder gets to keep his shirt and his former employees don't have to pretend they never worked there if they want to find a job.
I think it's unlikely that anyone would be successful suing them for turning over data due to a court order. But you're right that the publicity generated could harm them.
With same day delivery, Amazon is looking to be the replacement for your local retailer. Or rather, to make it work, maybe what they really need to be is the delivery service for your local retailer. They find the best price they can get for the item you want from a local retailer and deliver it the same day. No need to stock anything at all.
Apex predators are an essential part of any ecosystem. When apex predators start failing that means the ecosystem is failing.
So it's basically just another metaphor that doesn't work for business. When a Great White Shark dies, that's bad for the ocean. When a Sumatran Tiger dies, that's bad for the jungle. When a sociopathic CEO fails, I don't give a shit.
Another way it doesn't apply is that the thing that is essential to the predator's survival is an animal that is totally destroyed when so used. Jeff Bezos is a businessman. The thing his business survives on is the fact that customers come to him with their business. He makes a margin on that business. the customer survives the transaction.
It is very un-predatory behavior.
Viewed at another level, you might say that his company is trying to take revenue away from competitors, and has an ambition to take all their business and thereby destroy them. Well fine, but that's not like what a predator does either. A predator tries to get its prey, but then it fills its belly and is satisfied and doesn't hunt for a while. It doesn't constantly invest energy in trying to expand its food supply. In fact, it invests no energy in that, beyond chasing competitors out of its territory. It never tries to increase its territory beyond what it needs to keep its belly full and its belly is not infinitely expansible.
So let's dispense with the bad metaphor. The behavior isn't predatory.
It's a distinctly human behavior: empire building.
Is there a difference between what you can legally be compelled to do and your duty?
2. Deliver all ads from those servers.
3. Evade taxes in every jurisdiction by declaring that all ad revenue is generated in FloatingAdServer1 through FloatingAdServer14.
4. Profit!
And if they had done it quietly, they would still be in business. Lavabit sabotaged their own business to make a stand. I think it's a foolish stand, because their business model was fundamentally flawed from a security standpoint: they had users' encryption keys.
If you want your data secure, you do not give anyone your keys, whether that person be a third party or the government. The government can make you give them your keys, but Lavabit can't. Why do they have anybody's keys?
You do when they have a warrant.
We need to redesign some parts of the infrastructure whether or not we switch to autonomous cars.
Even 20 minutes is death to a person in cardiac arrest. If you think it could take that long to get an ambulance, better to drive, whether or not breaking traffic laws on the way.
On the other hand, there will be significantly fewer people needing to go to the emergency room if there are fewer car accidents.
A little more than you're paying to rent a car now, if you want to make a similar rent-by-the-day contract. If you want an automated cab ride, it would be less than we pay now for cab rides.