Except there isn't less traffic between hubs today, and most 787s thus far delivered are on those hub routes rather than point to point...
I'm not so sure that's true. About 1/2 of the 787s appear to be on hub-secondary city vs hub-to-hub routes. The 787s are filling in the routes that don't work economically with a 777...
For example, you can now fly from San Jose to Heathrow, Beijing, and Narita on a 787. And from San Francisco, you can fly to Amsterdam, Narita, Osaka, Chengu, Shanghai, Tel Aviv, Zurich (and of course some hubs like Heathrow, Paris, Seoul, Melborne, Singapore). Many of these routes did not exist before the 787 and required a hub connection.
As 787 are large planes, naturally, one side is likely going to be a hub because the carriers still have to direct traffic to their 787 routes to fill them up. As smaller planes like 737max and a321neo come on line, then you will start to see more point-to-point (they need even fewer passengers to be profitable, so point-to-point makes more sense than with an 787 (or a350).
What this means is that if you live in a secondary city, you can now fly to more distant hub cities w/o making a connection (which is something that only people in hub cities were able to do previously). Secondary city passengers historically had to make 2 connections to go to another distant secondary city in another country, and for many folks this is now starting to get reduced to one connection which is a big win.
Most of the time, a researcher or their group will publish multiple papers that are related. That's because they're funded by the same grant or a follow-up grant from the original. When you publish a paper in a journal, you sign over the copyright to your work. Using your previously published work is then considered plagiarism. If you need to use the prior work in a new paper, the only option is to cite yourself or whoever in your group published that paper. It's a consequence of how journals and copyrights work. I suspect most people who cite themselves aren't really doing it to inflate their citations but because they have to do so.
Well, if the author (or others in their research group) are citing the paper, I'd argue whether it is "necessary" or not, they are effectively inflating their citations. One might also rightly argue that if these are the *only* citations of their research, that their research effectively falls into the uncited category since their "necessary" citations pushes their number above zero (which was the point I was trying to make).
I wonder how the citation numbers would change if you subtract the citations with authors citing their earlier works and work of others in their own research groups...
Actually the numbers for Engineering don't surprise me. Many of the IEEE journals I read are seemly are filled with reams of research that do not appear to be cite worthy (too specific and/or you are left wondering how it got past peer review)... ACM journals are a bit better (by a little). Often it appears that the lead-time to appear in some journals is working against getting cited (in some fast moving tech fields, a year later a paper can be obsolete) meaning high-profile conference papers get inordinate attention whilst others toil in obscurity until their are obsolete...
Though I am not on the cryptocurrency bandwagon, I am glad that it is a currency that no government would be willing to bail out in the invent it crashes. So that's good news for those taxpayers that constantly bailout companies' and governments' bad decisions. So please, by all means, underwrite your mortgage for Bitcoin, I need to buy the cheap real estate on fire sales. BTW, I won't be accepting Bitcoin as rent.
Although nobody is gonna be bailing out BitCoin, you don't seem to understand how the mortgage bailout happened.
The 2008 failure came from unsupported counter-party risk (incl obscure things like credit default swaps). That caused liquidity issues with Lehman brothers and AIG and other insurance companies. The problem wasn't with the mortgages, per-se, but with people betting on the mortgages (e.g., the people offering to insure them based on complicated financial arrangements that proved unsound). If people are taking out mortgages to buy bitcoin, they are taking on the risk, but if corporations do this, they generally hedge with insurance contracts and re-insurance (how else would you justify complicated financial arrangements).
The problem is that if enough cards fall down, the corporations need the payouts from the insurance contracts. If all hell breaks loose, the companies that underwrote the insurance contracts are not going to be liquid enough to pay those out. Also, even those that thought they have bought insurance for other things (e.g., not bitcoin, not sub-prime mortgages) realize that the insurance company they paid premiums to all those years will evaporate and not make good on their payouts in other areas. This is when the bail out pressure mounts. You don't bail out the mortgages, you bail out the companies that underwrote the insurance contracts (like the US bailed out AIG for $85B and loaned JP Morgan Chase $29B to buy out the insolvent Bear Stearns) and the companies that wrote the mortgages ($200B for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae). In comparison, only a measly $24B went for direct mortgage relief...
Fortunately, BTC is probably too small to matter today. BTC market is only $276B total vs $10T for mortgage debt (~$5T pre-Year2000). Unfortunately, the Chicago Board has opened up BitCoin Futures to ratchet things up a level. With an established futures market, it will be possible to play BTC swings w/o being limited by actual BTC holdings. BTC holding insurance contracts can be written backed by BTC futures contracts and people can speculate on those as well. We'll see how big that futures and derivatives market gets relative to the underlying BTC (in some areas, you can see 10x the market in futures/derivatives over the underlying asset).
Things are a bunch more intertwined than anyone might imagine. Get your popcorn ready, the show is about to start....
>People had a really hard life back then. 40 years, if you made it that far, was REALLY old.
I was going to school you on life expectancy after early mortality was removed... but a bit of research shows 40 WAS damn old until a few hundred years into the common era, though late 50s had been not terribly uncommon for a maybe a thousand years by then - if you lived in the right place, of course.
The change in life expectancy of mature men has not changed as dramatically over 3000 years as might be expected, although this data must of necessity refer to privileged members of society.
The observation being, it probably matters less where you lived than if you lived a hard life...
On the other hand, this observation doesn't appear to apply to women.
Life expectancy of women at the age of 15 years has however changed dramatically over the last 600 years and by a decade and a half since the mid-Victorian period.
One wonders what socio-economic forces might explain this
We train some technology to create fakes, and more technology to detect fakes and let them train each other. After a while training, we have a pretty good technology to create fakes that we humans can't easily detect...
Crime is crime. Artificial categorizations like federal versus state versus local are irrelevant. All of those sum together to give the crime that will be experienced in a given area. Any area with a large number of illegal aliens will inherently have a higher crime rate until those illegal aliens are deported and prevented from returning, because they're perpetually in a state of committing crime by being in the country illegally.
Of course you are free to slice statistics anyway you want on/., but when people talk about crime rate, they are generally talking about UCR (FBI uniform crime reporting) where they do not count the crime of immigration violation in the statistics.
Similarly, there doesn't seem to be any correlation with the standard measurement of crime rate and the immigrant population (documented or undocumented). [citation offered] http://www.governing.com/gov-d...
Besides crime rate doesn't count the continual state of committing a crime as more than one crime (the denominator rate is per capita/unit time). Even under your "crime-is-a-crime" measurement technique, one parking ticket every year and a continuous immigration violation would both count as one crime in the numerator and be divided by the population to add to the annual crime rate that year so it probably wouldn't move the needle much anyhow...
Illegal aliens are perpetually breaking the law and committing a crime every single moment they're in the country illegally. When they are in a given area, the crime rate of that area inherently increases because of the presence of these illegal aliens who are at all times in a state of law-breaking and criminality.
Illegal aliens (aka undocumented immigrants) are perpetually breaking a *federal* law. They aren't breaking a *state* law or a *local* law. Although when people generally talk about crime statistics, they talk about breaking *state* laws (e.g., murder, theft, burglary), not federal immigration law (or even federal drug laws) or even *local* laws (e.g., parking tickets, loitering). But of course since this is/. we are free to make up whatever definitions suit our point, right?
Apple didn't charge the customers, they extorted money from companies wanting to get to their customers. The only difference? One is "apple" and the other is the hated "internet service provider"...
"An enterprising company" advertises taxi services for less than the prevailing rate. I'll call the service "Hot Taxi" because it depends on stolen payment accounts/credit cards.
A potential rider contacts Hot Taxi.
Hot Taxi and the rider work out the details of the rider's payment (a rate less than Uber or Lyft, presumably), the pickup and the drop off.
Hot Taxi books an Uber ride with a stolen CC.
At the end of the ride, Uber charges the stolen credit card, and while the rider has to pay Hot Taxi via something like the Russian equivalent of PayPal or Venmo.
Boom. The rider gets a taxi ride from Hot Taxi that costs less than the going Uber rate and Hot Taxi pockets the money, because they don't have to pay the driver, Uber does.
Actually, Uber likely doesn't have to pay either, the CC issuer pays for fraudulent transactions which in the end means all those that have CC pay (where those that carry a monthly balance and pay interest suffer the higher burden)...
FWIW, this doesn't describe a screw-Uber scam, it's basically a stick-it-to-the-man plan (the man being the collective CC holders)...
If there are 20 people whose name start with "Pat", there's a good chance several of them will be named "Patrick". What kind of party is that anyway? The anuual meeting of "People named Pat, Chris, or Sam"?
Isn't that sort of like demonstrating the value of biodiversity by killing off the last pair of dodo birds in front of class? "But how will the species survive now?"
"Exactly."/walks out
Isn't that kind of overkill? You only need to kill one of them, right? I think they even knew that back in 1662;^)
At some point in time (with the rapid advance of quantum computing), I suspect it may become feasible to perform a salvage operation on the wallet keys to recover the coin...
Of course "guessing" a 256-bit key is impractical, but I wonder how many of these "lost" coin are protected by mini-private keys that have somewhat weaker than average and might be amenable to a small quantum computer attack.
Also, although I suspect that some of the coin have never been spent, those that have been spent, it might be interesting to forensically attempt to track them and look for potential weaknesses in the generation of the key itself (many random number generators in wide usage have quite a few weaknesses)...
Seriously, most businesses don't need to be "administered". Administrating is for the conglomerates, and although I'm sure conglomerates need new canon fodder to back-fill their management ranks, it certainly doesn't have the number of chairs to support the multitude of MBA conferring organizations that are out there today. Even among huge conglomerates long McDonalds and Costco, they often draw their executives from line workers not freshly minted MBAs...
For the non-conglomerate business, the reason they often fail is for lack of vision, not lack of administration...
As for the "accounting" MBAs, well, do we need to engineer more Joint Energy Development Investment Limited Partnerships, or ChewCos?
As for the "finance" MBAs, well, do conglomerates need more leveraged buyouts, or engineer more Credit Default Swaps?
I invested in it and got burned. That hurts since i only make $50,000 in IT in Silicon Valley. I guess lesson learned - don't invest in startups that you don't know.
You learned the wrong lesson then... Clearly, you should have learned that the way to get rich in Silicon Valley is to start your own company and have others that you don't know invest in your startup...
So yeah, genes do need some "elevated privileges" to run:)
If there were privileges involved, there wouldn't be things like cancer... Think of inserting misinformed proteins like an SQL injection attack. Of course there is partitioning of using the wrong genetic information which protects against well-formed requests, but there isn't actually any privilege levels per-se...
Scarily, apparently this treatment doesn't require elevated privileges.
The firewall in the human body is easy to breach and once you get your genetic code in there, it apparently runs with the same privileges as any other code. Also, nobody knows how to patch against this exploit...
If we get to a level where we deem a program to be artificially intelligent, then is it murder when we power off the server that runs the program?
An apropos time to bring up this short story called "Answer" by Fredric Brown...
Dwar Ev ceremoniously soldered the final connection with gold. The eyes of a dozen television cameras watched him and the subether bore throughout the universe a dozen pictures of what he was doing.
He straightened and nodded to Dwar Reyn, then moved to a position beside the switch that would complete the contact when he threw it. The switch that would connect, all at once, all of the monster computing machines of all the populated planets in the universe—ninety-six billion planets—into the supercircuit that would connect them all into one supercalculator, one cybernetics machine that would combine all the knowledge of all the galaxies.
Dwar Reyn spoke briefly to the watching and listening trillions. Then after a moment’s silence he said, “Now, Dwar Ev.”
Dwar Ev threw the switch. There was a mighty hum, the surge of power from ninety-six billion planets. Lights flashed and quieted along the miles-long panel.
Dwar Ev stepped back and drew a deep breath. “The honor of asking the first question is yours, Dwar Reyn.”
“Thank you,” said Dwar Reyn. “It shall be a question which no single cybernetics machine has been able to answer.”
He turned to face the machine. “Is there a God?”
The mighty voice answered without hesitation, without the clicking of a single relay.
“Yes, now there is a God.”
Sudden fear flashed on the face of Dwar Ev. He leaped to grab the switch.
A bolt of lightning from the cloudless sky struck him down and fused the switch shut.
Slashdot Mirror
Except there isn't less traffic between hubs today, and most 787s thus far delivered are on those hub routes rather than point to point...
I'm not so sure that's true. About 1/2 of the 787s appear to be on hub-secondary city vs hub-to-hub routes. The 787s are filling in the routes that don't work economically with a 777...
http://www.airportspotting.com...
For example, you can now fly from San Jose to Heathrow, Beijing, and Narita on a 787. And from San Francisco, you can fly to Amsterdam, Narita, Osaka, Chengu, Shanghai, Tel Aviv, Zurich (and of course some hubs like Heathrow, Paris, Seoul, Melborne, Singapore). Many of these routes did not exist before the 787 and required a hub connection.
As 787 are large planes, naturally, one side is likely going to be a hub because the carriers still have to direct traffic to their 787 routes to fill them up. As smaller planes like 737max and a321neo come on line, then you will start to see more point-to-point (they need even fewer passengers to be profitable, so point-to-point makes more sense than with an 787 (or a350).
What this means is that if you live in a secondary city, you can now fly to more distant hub cities w/o making a connection (which is something that only people in hub cities were able to do previously). Secondary city passengers historically had to make 2 connections to go to another distant secondary city in another country, and for many folks this is now starting to get reduced to one connection which is a big win.
FWIW, Maybe people forgot this, but M$FT made a big investment in FACE about a decade ago...
https://www.recode.net/2017/10...
Most of the time, a researcher or their group will publish multiple papers that are related. That's because they're funded by the same grant or a follow-up grant from the original. When you publish a paper in a journal, you sign over the copyright to your work. Using your previously published work is then considered plagiarism. If you need to use the prior work in a new paper, the only option is to cite yourself or whoever in your group published that paper. It's a consequence of how journals and copyrights work. I suspect most people who cite themselves aren't really doing it to inflate their citations but because they have to do so.
Well, if the author (or others in their research group) are citing the paper, I'd argue whether it is "necessary" or not, they are effectively inflating their citations. One might also rightly argue that if these are the *only* citations of their research, that their research effectively falls into the uncited category since their "necessary"
citations pushes their number above zero (which was the point I was trying to make).
I wonder how the citation numbers would change if you subtract the citations with authors citing their earlier works and work of others in their own research groups...
Actually the numbers for Engineering don't surprise me. Many of the IEEE journals I read are seemly are filled with reams of research that do not appear to be cite worthy (too specific and/or you are left wondering how it got past peer review)... ACM journals are a bit better (by a little). Often it appears that the lead-time to appear in some journals is working against getting cited (in some fast moving tech fields, a year later a paper can be obsolete) meaning high-profile conference papers get inordinate attention whilst others toil in obscurity until their are obsolete...
I'd think archival paper and ink
If you've been watching Mr. Robot, you might reconsider that backup strategy...
Though I am not on the cryptocurrency bandwagon, I am glad that it is a currency that no government would be willing to bail out in the invent it crashes. So that's good news for those taxpayers that constantly bailout companies' and governments' bad decisions. So please, by all means, underwrite your mortgage for Bitcoin, I need to buy the cheap real estate on fire sales. BTW, I won't be accepting Bitcoin as rent.
Although nobody is gonna be bailing out BitCoin, you don't seem to understand how the mortgage bailout happened.
The 2008 failure came from unsupported counter-party risk (incl obscure things like credit default swaps). That caused liquidity issues with Lehman brothers and AIG and other insurance companies. The problem wasn't with the mortgages, per-se, but with people betting on the mortgages (e.g., the people offering to insure them based on complicated financial arrangements that proved unsound). If people are taking out mortgages to buy bitcoin, they are taking on the risk, but if corporations do this, they generally hedge with insurance contracts and re-insurance (how else would you justify complicated financial arrangements).
The problem is that if enough cards fall down, the corporations need the payouts from the insurance contracts. If all hell breaks loose, the companies that underwrote the insurance contracts are not going to be liquid enough to pay those out. Also, even those that thought they have bought insurance for other things (e.g., not bitcoin, not sub-prime mortgages) realize that the insurance company they paid premiums to all those years will evaporate and not make good on their payouts in other areas. This is when the bail out pressure mounts. You don't bail out the mortgages, you bail out the companies that underwrote the insurance contracts (like the US bailed out AIG for $85B and loaned JP Morgan Chase $29B to buy out the insolvent Bear Stearns) and the companies that wrote the mortgages ($200B for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae). In comparison, only a measly $24B went for direct mortgage relief...
Fortunately, BTC is probably too small to matter today. BTC market is only $276B total vs $10T for mortgage debt (~$5T pre-Year2000). Unfortunately, the Chicago Board has opened up BitCoin Futures to ratchet things up a level. With an established futures market, it will be possible to play BTC swings w/o being limited by actual BTC holdings. BTC holding insurance contracts can be written backed by BTC futures contracts and people can speculate on those as well. We'll see how big that futures and derivatives market gets relative to the underlying BTC (in some areas, you can see 10x the market in futures/derivatives over the underlying asset).
Things are a bunch more intertwined than anyone might imagine. Get your popcorn ready, the show is about to start....
>People had a really hard life back then. 40 years, if you made it that far, was REALLY old.
I was going to school you on life expectancy after early mortality was removed... but a bit of research shows 40 WAS damn old until a few hundred years into the common era, though late 50s had been not terribly uncommon for a maybe a thousand years by then - if you lived in the right place, of course.
Maybe you should look a bit harder...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
Specifically this table...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
The change in life expectancy of mature men has not changed as dramatically over 3000 years as might be expected, although this data must of necessity refer to privileged members of society.
The observation being, it probably matters less where you lived than if you lived a hard life...
On the other hand, this observation doesn't appear to apply to women.
Life expectancy of women at the age of 15 years has however changed dramatically over the last 600 years and by a decade and a half since the mid-Victorian period.
One wonders what socio-economic forces might explain this
Strange how technology eventually fools itself, eh?
As it turns out, that's by design...
We train some technology to create fakes, and more technology to detect fakes and let them train each other. After a while training, we have a pretty good technology to create fakes that we humans can't easily detect...
Crime is crime. Artificial categorizations like federal versus state versus local are irrelevant. All of those sum together to give the crime that will be experienced in a given area. Any area with a large number of illegal aliens will inherently have a higher crime rate until those illegal aliens are deported and prevented from returning, because they're perpetually in a state of committing crime by being in the country illegally.
Of course you are free to slice statistics anyway you want on /., but when people talk about crime rate, they are generally talking about UCR (FBI uniform crime reporting) where they do not count the crime of immigration violation in the statistics.
Similarly, there doesn't seem to be any correlation with the standard measurement of crime rate and the immigrant population (documented or undocumented).
[citation offered] http://www.governing.com/gov-d...
Besides crime rate doesn't count the continual state of committing a crime as more than one crime (the denominator rate is per capita/unit time). Even under your "crime-is-a-crime" measurement technique, one parking ticket every year and a continuous immigration violation would both count as one crime in the numerator and be divided by the population to add to the annual crime rate that year so it probably wouldn't move the needle much anyhow...
Illegal aliens are perpetually breaking the law and committing a crime every single moment they're in the country illegally. When they are in a given area, the crime rate of that area inherently increases because of the presence of these illegal aliens who are at all times in a state of law-breaking and criminality.
Illegal aliens (aka undocumented immigrants) are perpetually breaking a *federal* law. They aren't breaking a *state* law or a *local* law. Although when people generally talk about crime statistics, they talk about breaking *state* laws (e.g., murder, theft, burglary), not federal immigration law (or even federal drug laws) or even *local* laws (e.g., parking tickets, loitering). But of course since this is /. we are free to make up whatever definitions suit our point, right?
Apple didn't charge the customers, they extorted money from companies wanting to get to their customers. The only difference? One is "apple" and the other is the hated "internet service provider"...
Actually, Uber likely doesn't have to pay either, the CC issuer pays for fraudulent transactions which in the end means all those that have CC pay (where those that carry a monthly balance and pay interest suffer the higher burden)...
FWIW, this doesn't describe a screw-Uber scam, it's basically a stick-it-to-the-man plan (the man being the collective CC holders)...
If there are 20 people whose name start with "Pat", there's a good chance several of them will be named "Patrick". What kind of party is that anyway? The anuual meeting of "People named Pat, Chris, or Sam"?
With a name like "Pat" you never know...
Isn't that sort of like demonstrating the value of biodiversity by killing off the last pair of dodo birds in front of class? "But how will the species survive now?"
"Exactly." /walks out
Isn't that kind of overkill? You only need to kill one of them, right? I think they even knew that back in 1662 ;^)
"Well, you could, but you'd be hit with long distance charges like you wouldn't believe"
Clearly, you weren't doing it correctly ;^) There were "numbers" you could dial get around that... ;^)
"Number please....."
Number? Murray Hill 5-9975... ;^)
At some point in time (with the rapid advance of quantum computing), I suspect it may become feasible to perform a salvage operation on the wallet keys to recover the coin...
Of course "guessing" a 256-bit key is impractical, but I wonder how many of these "lost" coin are protected by mini-private keys that have somewhat weaker than average and might be amenable to a small quantum computer attack.
Also, although I suspect that some of the coin have never been spent, those that have been spent, it might be interesting to forensically attempt to track them and look for potential weaknesses in the generation of the key itself (many random number generators in wide usage have quite a few weaknesses)...
Seriously, most businesses don't need to be "administered". Administrating is for the conglomerates, and although I'm sure conglomerates need new canon fodder to back-fill their management ranks, it certainly doesn't have the number of chairs to support the multitude of MBA conferring organizations that are out there today. Even among huge conglomerates long McDonalds and Costco, they often draw their executives from line workers not freshly minted MBAs...
For the non-conglomerate business, the reason they often fail is for lack of vision, not lack of administration...
As for the "accounting" MBAs, well, do we need to engineer more Joint Energy Development Investment Limited Partnerships, or ChewCos?
As for the "finance" MBAs, well, do conglomerates need more leveraged buyouts, or engineer more Credit Default Swaps?
As for these second tier MBA schools that can't attract students? Nothing of value was lost...
I invested in it and got burned. That hurts since i only make $50,000 in IT in Silicon Valley. I guess lesson learned - don't invest in startups that you don't know.
You learned the wrong lesson then...
Clearly, you should have learned that the way to get rich in Silicon Valley is to start your own company and have others that you don't know invest in your startup...
So yeah, genes do need some "elevated privileges" to run :)
If there were privileges involved, there wouldn't be things like cancer...
Think of inserting misinformed proteins like an SQL injection attack.
Of course there is partitioning of using the wrong genetic information which protects against well-formed requests, but there isn't actually any privilege levels per-se...
you forgot
$ sudo newgenes
Scarily, apparently this treatment doesn't require elevated privileges.
The firewall in the human body is easy to breach and once you get your genetic code in there, it apparently runs with the same privileges as any other code. Also, nobody knows how to patch against this exploit...
Bad example maybe? Doesn't seem to have happened. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There are many other examples...
http://listverse.com/2009/06/2...
Man created Religion
Man destroyed Religion,
Man created AI
AI destroys Man
AI creates Religion.
Religion destroys AI... Cockroaches inherit the earth...
If we get to a level where we deem a program to be artificially intelligent, then is it murder when we power off the server that runs the program?
An apropos time to bring up this short story called "Answer" by Fredric Brown ...
Dwar Ev ceremoniously soldered the final connection with gold. The eyes of a dozen television cameras watched him and the subether bore throughout the universe a dozen pictures of what he was doing.
He straightened and nodded to Dwar Reyn, then moved to a position beside the switch that would complete the contact when he threw it. The switch that would connect, all at once, all of the monster computing machines of all the populated planets in the universe—ninety-six billion planets—into the supercircuit that would connect them all into one supercalculator, one cybernetics machine that would combine all the knowledge of all the galaxies.
Dwar Reyn spoke briefly to the watching and listening trillions. Then after a moment’s silence he said, “Now, Dwar Ev.”
Dwar Ev threw the switch. There was a mighty hum, the surge of power from ninety-six billion planets. Lights flashed and quieted along the miles-long panel.
Dwar Ev stepped back and drew a deep breath. “The honor of asking the first question is yours, Dwar Reyn.”
“Thank you,” said Dwar Reyn. “It shall be a question which no single cybernetics machine has been able to answer.”
He turned to face the machine. “Is there a God?”
The mighty voice answered without hesitation, without the clicking of a single relay.
“Yes, now there is a God.”
Sudden fear flashed on the face of Dwar Ev. He leaped to grab the switch.
A bolt of lightning from the cloudless sky struck him down and fused the switch shut.
I'm pretty sure most religions existed before tax breaks...
Actually, I think taxing was *invented* by religion (tithing)...