Yes. All the agents at the FBI who are actually conducting the investigation of the Russian connection. You didn't actually think Comey was conducting that investigation personally, did you?
AI to control traffic has been around for years. It's probably a classic project in introductory AI courses.
Switching most stoplights to one side blinking yellow and the other side blinking red between the hours of 9pm and 6am. Most stoplights seem to be set up to control heavy traffic during the day, and are completely superfluous in light traffic. It sucks to come to a stop and wait in the middle of the night at a large, empty intersection. Set the lights to blinking, so that only traffic from the lighter travelled road has to stop, and save half the electricity of keeping the lights on. Or save even more with a different duty cycle.
This would be a lot easier to implement than getting an AI through the government procurement process, because nothing new would have to be bought.
Not to throw you reasoning askew, but could this be because the drug use is ancillary. Consider that police may not get calls for fights, break-ins, etc in higher income neighborhoods, so they have fewer reason to be patrolling those areas. The residents of higher income neighborhoods would be less likely to parade around the neighborhood with their drugs. That is, while they are using the drugs, they are not making themselves a public nuisance, let alone a public safety issue.
If the point of the police is to insure public safety, instead of enforcing arbitrary laws, if follows that the reinforcing data you point out would actually still work toward the ultimate goal.
I can't imagine any way that 4K satellites will be able to handle the bandwidth requirements of a significant percentage of Americans, let alone the world. Everyone can get Netflix on their cellphones, because the same frequencies can be used over and over in different locations. It is still a shared resource, though. Busy areas have to be subdivided and more towers built with lower power output iin order for everyone to get their own favorite shows. I foresee this service being limited to a small number of the wealthiest or most desperate people.
I think the difference is that local cable companies began acquiring monopolies across wide areas, and then began trying to leverage those monopolies to extort money from large content providers.
Either the issue of regional consolidation must be addressed, or net neutrality. If I can switch to a different ISP, I'll switch to one that doesn't put a choke on my choice to access Netflix. But, if my only choice is between the latest iteration of Time-Warner or that 28k modem....well, the regional monopoly has me across a barrel, doesn't it?
I do agree, though. If the FTC is keeping the monopolies in check, there is no need for the FCC.
I worked at a large appliance manufacturer. Part of the UL stamp is having a processor check itself. The embedded software has to have a thread that launches every few milliseconds to have the processor check it's own operation.
This is the type of government program I like to see. The government is not mandating which appliance to buy. They are making a measuring stick available, and mandating that you can't lie about it. The "founding father's" made the central government responsible for setting weights and measures for a good reason. A fair market is impossible without agreed upon measures.
I wish they'd taken the same approach with the FDA. Instead of saying, "Drug X may not be sold", or "Drug Y may only be used for this specific application.", technology would have advanced much quicker and cheaper if they published a registry saying, "We have determined that Drug X has shown efficacy for this application." I'd still need my doctor, but he (and the army of bureaucrats blocking him) wouldn't be the gateway to which drug I could buy.
If Trump wants to cut the budget, make the FDA follow the Energy Star Program. Make the Dept of Education an advisory board ("We have studied the problem, and found these remedies work in those situations. Now, localities can more intelligently work out your own education programs.").
This makes a lot of sense for China. If you're building out new infrastructure, build with the one that will be most cost effective in the future. You can take a solar panel to a remote village, and use a few hundred yards of copper to give lighting to all the houses....or, you can build a centralized coal plant and run hundreds of miles of copper to give lighting to all the houses. The renewable solar wins on a cost basis, even if you ignore the renewable.
But, in this scenario, the city owns the only part of the network which requires the city to use the power of eminent domain to be built out. This scenario allow the government to avoid the moral quandary of forcibly taking property from private individuals to serve the desires of another.
As a mostly libertarian person, I see this as a reason for the government to have control of the communication system in the same model as they have roadways. Want to connect to the roads (by driving your car on it), then you have to meet specific standards meant to protect everyone else, but other than that you are free to connect and go where you want. You pay for your usage (through gas taxes...a model that is currently in flux due to electric vehicles), but other than that, no one tells you how much you can use or where you can go.
In fact, anything that requires the power of eminent domain should be handled this way. Electric grid owned by government. Anyone can produce and sell through it, as long as they meet the safety requirements.
If the cable companies want to throttle traffic depending on where it comes from, at the least they would need to lose common carrier status.
Most people pushing for bigger government programs. That skews towards democrats, but there are plenty of republicans with the same magical thinking. They just don't consider them pointless or onerous. They, having never run a business, can't envision the compliance cost, and believe that they will make the world a utopia (ignoring that most people will search for a way around them).
Or get a job on the star liner to serve the wealthy, and see space that way.
The alternative is for the government to do it, and have it locked up for "heroes", and you only have a chance to see it if you are from a "protected class", so that you can be a propaganda piece.
Just think what the airlines would be like if the airlines had not been privatized.
Hillary proved to us all with her email that this is not an issue. The government will allow your lawyers to go through it and decide what the government should be allowed to see.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. All the agents at the FBI who are actually conducting the investigation of the Russian connection. You didn't actually think Comey was conducting that investigation personally, did you?
If there is any evidence, why would firing Comey even slow down the investigation?
So, how will the dismissal of Comey have any effect on grand jury subpoenas that have already been issued?
AI to control traffic has been around for years. It's probably a classic project in introductory AI courses.
Switching most stoplights to one side blinking yellow and the other side blinking red between the hours of 9pm and 6am. Most stoplights seem to be set up to control heavy traffic during the day, and are completely superfluous in light traffic. It sucks to come to a stop and wait in the middle of the night at a large, empty intersection. Set the lights to blinking, so that only traffic from the lighter travelled road has to stop, and save half the electricity of keeping the lights on. Or save even more with a different duty cycle.
This would be a lot easier to implement than getting an AI through the government procurement process, because nothing new would have to be bought.
Been mostly done already. Watch this Chris Rock video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8
So, continue to train it. With proper feedback factors, the bias should lose influence on the outcome. If it doesn't, it isn't a very good AI.
Not to throw you reasoning askew, but could this be because the drug use is ancillary. Consider that police may not get calls for fights, break-ins, etc in higher income neighborhoods, so they have fewer reason to be patrolling those areas. The residents of higher income neighborhoods would be less likely to parade around the neighborhood with their drugs. That is, while they are using the drugs, they are not making themselves a public nuisance, let alone a public safety issue.
If the point of the police is to insure public safety, instead of enforcing arbitrary laws, if follows that the reinforcing data you point out would actually still work toward the ultimate goal.
I can't imagine any way that 4K satellites will be able to handle the bandwidth requirements of a significant percentage of Americans, let alone the world. Everyone can get Netflix on their cellphones, because the same frequencies can be used over and over in different locations. It is still a shared resource, though. Busy areas have to be subdivided and more towers built with lower power output iin order for everyone to get their own favorite shows. I foresee this service being limited to a small number of the wealthiest or most desperate people.
I think the difference is that local cable companies began acquiring monopolies across wide areas, and then began trying to leverage those monopolies to extort money from large content providers.
Either the issue of regional consolidation must be addressed, or net neutrality. If I can switch to a different ISP, I'll switch to one that doesn't put a choke on my choice to access Netflix. But, if my only choice is between the latest iteration of Time-Warner or that 28k modem....well, the regional monopoly has me across a barrel, doesn't it?
I do agree, though. If the FTC is keeping the monopolies in check, there is no need for the FCC.
Infosys is one of those companies abusing H1B visas, aren't they?
They're just trying to get the scrutiny off themselves?
I bet you would also believe that the handbag you bought for $20 on a corner is New York is an actual Gucci, too.
UL is a joke.
I worked at a large appliance manufacturer. Part of the UL stamp is having a processor check itself. The embedded software has to have a thread that launches every few milliseconds to have the processor check it's own operation.
This is the type of government program I like to see. The government is not mandating which appliance to buy. They are making a measuring stick available, and mandating that you can't lie about it. The "founding father's" made the central government responsible for setting weights and measures for a good reason. A fair market is impossible without agreed upon measures.
I wish they'd taken the same approach with the FDA. Instead of saying, "Drug X may not be sold", or "Drug Y may only be used for this specific application.", technology would have advanced much quicker and cheaper if they published a registry saying, "We have determined that Drug X has shown efficacy for this application." I'd still need my doctor, but he (and the army of bureaucrats blocking him) wouldn't be the gateway to which drug I could buy.
If Trump wants to cut the budget, make the FDA follow the Energy Star Program. Make the Dept of Education an advisory board ("We have studied the problem, and found these remedies work in those situations. Now, localities can more intelligently work out your own education programs.").
This makes a lot of sense for China. If you're building out new infrastructure, build with the one that will be most cost effective in the future. You can take a solar panel to a remote village, and use a few hundred yards of copper to give lighting to all the houses....or, you can build a centralized coal plant and run hundreds of miles of copper to give lighting to all the houses. The renewable solar wins on a cost basis, even if you ignore the renewable.
And yet....I feel myself getting so lonely when they're not around.
That would depend entirely upon how many positions you round to.
There should be a 4 year program for that. It should be called High School.
But, in this scenario, the city owns the only part of the network which requires the city to use the power of eminent domain to be built out. This scenario allow the government to avoid the moral quandary of forcibly taking property from private individuals to serve the desires of another.
As a mostly libertarian person, I see this as a reason for the government to have control of the communication system in the same model as they have roadways. Want to connect to the roads (by driving your car on it), then you have to meet specific standards meant to protect everyone else, but other than that you are free to connect and go where you want. You pay for your usage (through gas taxes...a model that is currently in flux due to electric vehicles), but other than that, no one tells you how much you can use or where you can go.
In fact, anything that requires the power of eminent domain should be handled this way. Electric grid owned by government. Anyone can produce and sell through it, as long as they meet the safety requirements.
If the cable companies want to throttle traffic depending on where it comes from, at the least they would need to lose common carrier status.
She lost to Donald friggin' Trump. You can't really lose much worse than that.
It's like your college team getting beat by the team from the "Middle School for the Blind Amputees."
What is the accusation? That the Russians were trying to rig the election by revealing how the Hillary camp was trying to rig the election?
Most people pushing for bigger government programs. That skews towards democrats, but there are plenty of republicans with the same magical thinking. They just don't consider them pointless or onerous. They, having never run a business, can't envision the compliance cost, and believe that they will make the world a utopia (ignoring that most people will search for a way around them).
Yes. Because, it's stuff that matters.
Or get a job on the star liner to serve the wealthy, and see space that way.
The alternative is for the government to do it, and have it locked up for "heroes", and you only have a chance to see it if you are from a "protected class", so that you can be a propaganda piece.
Just think what the airlines would be like if the airlines had not been privatized.
Hillary proved to us all with her email that this is not an issue. The government will allow your lawyers to go through it and decide what the government should be allowed to see.