This is something about law I don't understand, which is how the hierarchy is determined. When a new law is in conflict with an old law, which one takes precedence? Sometimes the new law will specifically address the old one, but with so many out there it must be easy to miss some (like this one). Was there a newer law dismissing this 1952 law? Here it seems like modern practice is in conflict with old law, but that still seems to win out as often as not.
I worked on code for a forensic DNA device. The FBI selected and standardized the DNA segments to be examined a long time ago, when it was harder to do and they didn't think they would be comparing millions of samples. Even though we could have made the device's test more accurate, it would not have violated standards and we wouldn't have been able to sell it for forensic purposes. At the time there were about two million people in their database, and you would expect several hundred matches per test. Another issue that came up is genetic drift; your cells rearrange their code depending on their function. You'd think that wouldn't have much affect on the individual segments being compared, but for whatever reason it does. I haven't seen a proper study on it, but there's a reasonable chance your skin, hair and blood won't match each other. The FBI doesn't have guidelines on where the sample comes from, often does not enter in the DB where the sample came from, and that info is not used in the analysis. There are also mutations over time, so that you may not match yourself from twenty years earlier. And of course certain parts you your body mutate faster than other parts, particularly the exposed, fast-growing organs.
I helped write code for the Plex-ID system, which among other things can identify every virus and bacteria in your spit by their genetic profile; spit in the tube, put it in the machine and wait an hour. CE (European Union) and FDA have similar requirements for a diagnostic device. But the FDA is pro-active and monitors development as it happens, where as CE takes a look at the paperwork once you are done and doesn't get in the way unless something goes wrong (in which case they come down hard, is what I hear). The upshot being that the Plex-ID has been available in Europe as a diagnostic device for the last two years, but is just coming to market in the US.
Monitoring by the FDA did encourage code hardening; they require design documents and tests to validate those requirements. But you write your own requirements and tests, and mostly the FDA checks that the QA team (who wrote test reports, not tests) didn't change a test name on the specialized form from one release to the next. The other thing the FDA is strict about is making sure everyone's time sheet is filled out daily and accurately reports time spent on Federal grant funded projects. Another difficulty with the approach of the FDA was is making design changes as you went; every significant change risked significant delays in approval.
Like I said CE has the same requirements, but they don't check things until it is done. So approval happens faster, requires a much smaller test team, development is more flexible and eats less time of group members. I'm sure there is a smarter way to interact with the FDA then we did, but their fundamental differences makes one a lot harder to please than the other, and produced the same product.
If you read the article, Kasparov appeals to the "Free World", in particular the United States government. That gave me a chuckle, if you don't like it feel free to protest in the designated free speech zone (Usenet or 4chan).
Neanderthals and a number of other extinct early hominids had brain sizes of 1600cc to 2200cc. Modern homo homo sapiens have a brain size of around 1200cc to 1500cc. Einstein's brain was around 1250cc. Sharks are the most enduring vertebrate on Earth, and have one of the lowest brain/body mass ratios. There's plenty of evidence to refute the premise. Marris in her Nature article is implying that large brain/body ratios increase species survival likelyhood, based on comparing a "primitive" class of mammals to a "modern" one. But it could just as well be their digestive system was more adaptable, superior immune systems, etc. She started with a theoretical classification of living and extinct mammals (paleo and modern) and tried to support her theory that one has a survival advantage. This is trying to make the empirical data fit the theoretical model, and is crummy science. If one were actually interested in extinction, they should study different species and why they went extinct or not, and then build a theory based on those empirical results.
Shark brains are tiny, but their distributed nervous system is perhaps more autonomous and substantial than mammalian ones. I've had a dogfish (small Atlantic shark) wiggle off the cutting board and swim away well after I had head and gutted it. When you eat their fresh meat it squirms when you bite it. Mako has a significantly bigger brain than a blue shark, but they're both much smaller than a deer's brain.
"I read an interview recently in which he said he had spent the GBP140K he had earned from his website on "normal student things" like going to the cinema and buying pizza. Which is such a load of bollocks it's a joke.. "
What if the file you end up downloading isn't the one you expected? Who's to say your IP address and presumably you, intended to download a file which exists under copyright? How do you know it is under copyright?
The number of processors are somewhat unrelated to the number of nodes in the scheme. Neural networks are highly parallel, so the more cores the faster it can run, with little limit to that equation. But you could model the billion-connection network with a single cpu, if you were really really patient.
Not to be historical here, but how often does the border sneak over the people? If America loves their culture and language so much, why did they give all those South-Eastern United States rivers, mountains, and cities Spanish names? And why are those cities full of Mexicans?
Slashdot Mirror
the unfittest monkey
This is something about law I don't understand, which is how the hierarchy is determined. When a new law is in conflict with an old law, which one takes precedence? Sometimes the new law will specifically address the old one, but with so many out there it must be easy to miss some (like this one). Was there a newer law dismissing this 1952 law? Here it seems like modern practice is in conflict with old law, but that still seems to win out as often as not.
Digger wasn't that well-known, so that's a bit surprising. But it's very well-written and depicted, and a complete story.
I worked on code for a forensic DNA device. The FBI selected and standardized the DNA segments to be examined a long time ago, when it was harder to do and they didn't think they would be comparing millions of samples. Even though we could have made the device's test more accurate, it would not have violated standards and we wouldn't have been able to sell it for forensic purposes. At the time there were about two million people in their database, and you would expect several hundred matches per test.
Another issue that came up is genetic drift; your cells rearrange their code depending on their function. You'd think that wouldn't have much affect on the individual segments being compared, but for whatever reason it does. I haven't seen a proper study on it, but there's a reasonable chance your skin, hair and blood won't match each other. The FBI doesn't have guidelines on where the sample comes from, often does not enter in the DB where the sample came from, and that info is not used in the analysis.
There are also mutations over time, so that you may not match yourself from twenty years earlier. And of course certain parts you your body mutate faster than other parts, particularly the exposed, fast-growing organs.
+1 succinct
Perhaps it's just that low IQ is correlated with answering "yes" on a marijuana survey.
I helped write code for the Plex-ID system, which among other things can identify every virus and bacteria in your spit by their genetic profile; spit in the tube, put it in the machine and wait an hour. CE (European Union) and FDA have similar requirements for a diagnostic device. But the FDA is pro-active and monitors development as it happens, where as CE takes a look at the paperwork once you are done and doesn't get in the way unless something goes wrong (in which case they come down hard, is what I hear). The upshot being that the Plex-ID has been available in Europe as a diagnostic device for the last two years, but is just coming to market in the US.
Monitoring by the FDA did encourage code hardening; they require design documents and tests to validate those requirements. But you write your own requirements and tests, and mostly the FDA checks that the QA team (who wrote test reports, not tests) didn't change a test name on the specialized form from one release to the next. The other thing the FDA is strict about is making sure everyone's time sheet is filled out daily and accurately reports time spent on Federal grant funded projects. Another difficulty with the approach of the FDA was is making design changes as you went; every significant change risked significant delays in approval.
Like I said CE has the same requirements, but they don't check things until it is done. So approval happens faster, requires a much smaller test team, development is more flexible and eats less time of group members. I'm sure there is a smarter way to interact with the FDA then we did, but their fundamental differences makes one a lot harder to please than the other, and produced the same product.
+1 succinct
Interesting hypothesis, but the conclusion doesn't follow.
If you read the article, Kasparov appeals to the "Free World", in particular the United States government. That gave me a chuckle, if you don't like it feel free to protest in the designated free speech zone (Usenet or 4chan).
WWII started because WWI ended with a big FUCK YOU to Germany.
I'm using hidemyass.com, it's working rather well. Also the snarky BBC commentators are pretty entertaining.
You can't legislate common sense
Neanderthals and a number of other extinct early hominids had brain sizes of 1600cc to 2200cc. Modern homo homo sapiens have a brain size of around 1200cc to 1500cc. Einstein's brain was around 1250cc. Sharks are the most enduring vertebrate on Earth, and have one of the lowest brain/body mass ratios. There's plenty of evidence to refute the premise.
Marris in her Nature article is implying that large brain/body ratios increase species survival likelyhood, based on comparing a "primitive" class of mammals to a "modern" one. But it could just as well be their digestive system was more adaptable, superior immune systems, etc. She started with a theoretical classification of living and extinct mammals (paleo and modern) and tried to support her theory that one has a survival advantage. This is trying to make the empirical data fit the theoretical model, and is crummy science. If one were actually interested in extinction, they should study different species and why they went extinct or not, and then build a theory based on those empirical results.
heh
Shark brains are tiny, but their distributed nervous system is perhaps more autonomous and substantial than mammalian ones. I've had a dogfish (small Atlantic shark) wiggle off the cutting board and swim away well after I had head and gutted it. When you eat their fresh meat it squirms when you bite it. Mako has a significantly bigger brain than a blue shark, but they're both much smaller than a deer's brain.
"If you're referring to Julian Assange, the US has brought no charges that are really crimes."
not true, they're just secret charges:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/revealed-us-plans-to-charge-assange-20120228-1u14o.html
"I read an interview recently in which he said he had spent the GBP140K he had earned from his website on "normal student things" like going to the cinema and buying pizza. Which is such a load of bollocks it's a joke.. "
You clearly haven't been to the cinema recently.
Only if you share the same bank account.
What if the file you end up downloading isn't the one you expected? Who's to say your IP address and presumably you, intended to download a file which exists under copyright? How do you know it is under copyright?
I want an iPad, but shit like this makes me wait.
Yay!
The number of processors are somewhat unrelated to the number of nodes in the scheme. Neural networks are highly parallel, so the more cores the faster it can run, with little limit to that equation. But you could model the billion-connection network with a single cpu, if you were really really patient.
Not to be historical here, but how often does the border sneak over the people? If America loves their culture and language so much, why did they give all those South-Eastern United States rivers, mountains, and cities Spanish names? And why are those cities full of Mexicans?
If you are a tourist you have already decided that full naked body scans and groping are ok with you.
I'm pretty sure the number of tourist who come to America specifically for that is non-zero.