Oh, and by the way, the IT giants also get paid by the tax-payers for handing over their data without a warrant. The IT giants and their business models, selling surveillance data to the govt. and other corporations, are the ones who make it all possible.
A maket-based solution is already underway. It consists of IT giants making minor, ineffectual changes to its software and services and then claiming that it's sufficient to stop warrantless spying on its consumers. Why provide real privacy, that would affect your profit margins and competitive edge, when you can provide the illusion of privacy and sell it with glossy PR and not have to do battle with the private security industry. What's more, about 80% of the NSA consists of private subcontractors so it's already a market-based solution. Unfortunately, whenever politicians talk about reducing the size of big gubbermint, they usually mean the bits that people like and need, like the social safety-net and education.
...that the people running startups have any choice in the matter. Aren't they too busy wooing investors to give much thought to who's lending them that money and what they'll want for it later?
To simply say that "free market capitalism works" isn't even wrong. Economies are complex and mixed. There has never been a purely free market economy anywhere in the world and there never will be. Thinking that one approach, one tool, and one set of measures will be appropriate for all cases and scenarios is plainly wrong. Economic policies, approaches, tools, and measures need to be selected and adjusted according to the circumstances in each case. Sometimes monetarism is appropriate, e.g. at the start of a period of growth, sometimes a more Keynesian policy, e.g. in a recession, etc.
Only a misinformed amateur would think that it's feasible to throw all the tools out of the box except one. Try listening to real economists instead of the amoral money grabbing psychopaths at the Chicago School, Wall St., and on Fox News.
Keep drinking the Silicon Valley/Wall St. cool-aid.
There's a difference between learning resources and teaching. Learning resources are only as useful as how well-prepared learners are to make sense of them and learn from them. It takes skilled, dedicated, experienced teachers to cultivate the atmosphere and conditions where learning can occur effectively. No amount of Internet access and learning resources, no matter how well designed, can make up for that.
Khan Academy itself is predicated on a now discredited model of learning (lecturing and testing), so don't expect too much from that. I understand, however, that some teachers are making creative use of the videos, so perhaps that could account for some of the successes.
The last thing i heard was that Silicon Valley are laying off a lot of its STEM-qualified workers. Do you think they need to make room for more sales and PR people?
What makes you think that the people who intend to use these robots, i.e. the US military and its allies, actually care about killing civilians? We are talking about the same organisations that ordered the fire-bombing of major cities with no strategic importance in Germany and Japan during WWII, aren't we? Who carpet bombed Vietnam and Cambodia? And the same ones that are now killing insurgent grandmothers and children with drones and cruise missiles? It seems they're far more interested in killing civilians than anyone else. Either that or they're incompetent.
Think of all the tax breaks, subsidies, political support, and administrative support that the fossil fuels industries get. Now imagine if alternative energies got half of that. Cool huh?
Not only this, with extreme weather events on the rise, flying is going to get more and more difficult.
Asserting it without proof doesn't make it true (sure, it's plausible, I'll grant that) nor does it say whether that increase in difficulty is significant or not.
Planes need a relatively stable cushion of air to sit on while they fly. If the air is moving around violently, the planes tend to move around violently with it. The difference in the levels of tolerance for violently moving air between plains and trains so that they can operate safely is significantly large.
It's old fashioned ad-hominem as used by big business since capitalism and PR began. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.c... It isn't effective at countering the critical journalism per se but it gives the pro-corporate, pro-silicon valley media something to distract us from the real issues.
Gladwell should learn how to read and interpret research properly and also, as a non-scientist himself, learn to ask the researchers if his conclusions reflect the findings of the research. With his "10,000 hour rule" he most definitely failed to do this and he got it spectacularly wrong. If I can remember correctly, he based it on one paper on one study, investigating practice habits of violinists at a music college in (Berlin?) Germany. One paper doesn't make an adequate foundation for a generalisable conclusion, especially in the social sciences. The standard deviation in this study was huge and 10,000 hours was simply the average. In other words, some violinists practice many more than 10,000 hours to reach mastery, while some didn't no matter how many hours they practiced, but more importantly, some reached mastery in far fewer than 10,000 hours.
Something that should ring alarm bells in your head when you read stuff like the 10,000 hours rule, and Gladwell when he writes this stuff, is that such simple, broad generalised "rules" are rare in the natural sciences and almost non-existent in the social sciences. Simply put, listening to Gladwell is a waste of time because he has neither the background knowledge and skills, nor the humilty to ask for help in critically analysing his own conclusions. But who cares when you can sell a lot of books? Never let facts and more knowledgeable people than yourself get in the way of a good story.
From now on, all computer games for distribution in the Swedish market will feature two women, Lina and Anneli, talking to each other about something other than men. Perhaps they can follow you around in GTA commenting on and discussing your actions from a critical feminism perspective?
Agreed. This looks more like a simple, straightforward combing through the data and looking for correlations. Take a small sample size first, find correlations and then apply it to a larger data set. Researchers have been doing this for decades, long before there was any such thing as "machine learning." i guess recursive algorithm doesn't catch the press' attention as much.
A quicker, simpler, easier (administratively, at least) solution is to close the massive tax loopholes and govt. subsidies that the fossil energy industry enjoys. If alternative energy got even half the level of support the fossil energy giants did, we'd live in a cleaner, safer, more stable world.
And yes, decent integrated public mass-transportation makes commuting and everyday moving around so much less stressful and more spontaneous. When living in Europe, the cost and convenience of getting from A to B on a daily basis was never an issue. Even Moscow's quicker, easier, and cheaper than N. American cities (And Moscow is one of the most expensive cities in the world to live in).
...because M$ always has to be different and effectively proprietary. I've been using WebRTC for weeks now and it works fine. I'm on Linux and it works on every browser I've tried; Firefox, Chromium, and Opera (developer). It works on Windows too in every browser except IE (any version). Try it for yourself for free and no need to sign up or anything: https://appear.in/ (There's multiple other demos out there on the web to try too).
Do you think M$ are afraid of users migrating to more hassle-free and universally useful/cross-compatible versions of VoIP if they see how easy it is?
Yeah, teh Germans, the French, the Spanish, the UK (only as an extension of the French system up to London), and China seem to be investing is alternative energy friendly, i.e. electricity, public infrastructure. Not only this, with extreme weather events on the rise, flying is going to get more and more difficult. I haven't heard of trains being stopped by wind, snow, rain, etc..
OK, in the UK, a few leaves on the tracks or a tiny bit of snow make the commuter trains in the south east grind to a halt but that doesn't seem to happen elsewhere in the UK where there's more snow and ice and maybe leaves.
Is someone here trying to imply that out elected leaders need to be competent? What nonsense! They only have to be compliant and obedient to their lords and masters on Wall Street, fossil fuels, defence contractors, big pharma, and big ag (Who did I miss?). They'll ensure that the "right" legislation gets written for them to pass by ALEC and other similar organisations.
Hey, it could work in the people's favor though. What if thousands went on a campaign to click the "terr'ist" button on all the articles having to do with Cameron himself?
What Cameron a radical terrorist? Who've you been talking to? What have they told you? He definitely isn't a terrorist. All those people he's ordered summarily executed, extraordinarily rendered, tortured, and sexually abused are the terrorists. He's keeping us safe from them. If they weren't running from our drones and death squads, they'd be out protesting and demanding democratic representation in their own countries!
Here's the problem with paying poverty wages for increasingly larger numbers of workers in a nutshell: http://therealnews.com/t2/inde...
tl;dw - If workers are on poverty wages, who's going to buy the stuff they're making? (Rich people don't consume enough to make up for the massive shortfall)
Re: " for a length of time before transitioning to a better position, either within the company or at another." -- So what jobs are the 1,000,000+ Walmart workers going to transfer to? An don't forget all the fast food workers and other "temporary" poverty-wage jobs. Where are those "better jobs"? What is Walmart's track record of its workers going on to "better jobs" in reality? How well is this supposed strategy working, assuming that it isn't a post-hoc rationalisation to support an incoherent opinion?
Dichotomy-based arguments are the refuge of the scoundrel. In real life, they don't exist. There's always more than two options and two possible outcomes. According to non-neoliberal economists, raising the minimum wage doesn't result in fewer jobs and there's empirical evidence to show that it's not hypothetical speculation. Apparently, the net effect of raising wages, within reason, is to generate further economic activity which in turn creates more jobs.
It's not just lefties who understand this. You can hear it from a successful billionnaire if you prefer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (BTW, TED Talks tried to suppress this talk. Does this make it flaimbait too?)
Stop believing in what you hear on Fox. It doesn't help anyone in the longer term.
So we're resorting to anecdotal evidence and emotional arguments: "If I can work 80 hours a week for chicken feed and feed a family of five on a poverty wage, why can't everyone else?"
I don't want to be a part of the cruel world you live in.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and by the way, the IT giants also get paid by the tax-payers for handing over their data without a warrant. The IT giants and their business models, selling surveillance data to the govt. and other corporations, are the ones who make it all possible.
A maket-based solution is already underway. It consists of IT giants making minor, ineffectual changes to its software and services and then claiming that it's sufficient to stop warrantless spying on its consumers. Why provide real privacy, that would affect your profit margins and competitive edge, when you can provide the illusion of privacy and sell it with glossy PR and not have to do battle with the private security industry. What's more, about 80% of the NSA consists of private subcontractors so it's already a market-based solution. Unfortunately, whenever politicians talk about reducing the size of big gubbermint, they usually mean the bits that people like and need, like the social safety-net and education.
Yay! The botnet of things! :)
Being first didn't seem to count much for Native Americans.
...that the people running startups have any choice in the matter. Aren't they too busy wooing investors to give much thought to who's lending them that money and what they'll want for it later?
To simply say that "free market capitalism works" isn't even wrong. Economies are complex and mixed. There has never been a purely free market economy anywhere in the world and there never will be. Thinking that one approach, one tool, and one set of measures will be appropriate for all cases and scenarios is plainly wrong. Economic policies, approaches, tools, and measures need to be selected and adjusted according to the circumstances in each case. Sometimes monetarism is appropriate, e.g. at the start of a period of growth, sometimes a more Keynesian policy, e.g. in a recession, etc.
Only a misinformed amateur would think that it's feasible to throw all the tools out of the box except one. Try listening to real economists instead of the amoral money grabbing psychopaths at the Chicago School, Wall St., and on Fox News.
Keep drinking the Silicon Valley/Wall St. cool-aid.
There's a difference between learning resources and teaching. Learning resources are only as useful as how well-prepared learners are to make sense of them and learn from them. It takes skilled, dedicated, experienced teachers to cultivate the atmosphere and conditions where learning can occur effectively. No amount of Internet access and learning resources, no matter how well designed, can make up for that.
Khan Academy itself is predicated on a now discredited model of learning (lecturing and testing), so don't expect too much from that. I understand, however, that some teachers are making creative use of the videos, so perhaps that could account for some of the successes.
The last thing i heard was that Silicon Valley are laying off a lot of its STEM-qualified workers. Do you think they need to make room for more sales and PR people?
What makes you think that the people who intend to use these robots, i.e. the US military and its allies, actually care about killing civilians? We are talking about the same organisations that ordered the fire-bombing of major cities with no strategic importance in Germany and Japan during WWII, aren't we? Who carpet bombed Vietnam and Cambodia? And the same ones that are now killing insurgent grandmothers and children with drones and cruise missiles? It seems they're far more interested in killing civilians than anyone else. Either that or they're incompetent.
Think of all the tax breaks, subsidies, political support, and administrative support that the fossil fuels industries get. Now imagine if alternative energies got half of that. Cool huh?
Not only this, with extreme weather events on the rise, flying is going to get more and more difficult.
Asserting it without proof doesn't make it true (sure, it's plausible, I'll grant that) nor does it say whether that increase in difficulty is significant or not.
Planes need a relatively stable cushion of air to sit on while they fly. If the air is moving around violently, the planes tend to move around violently with it. The difference in the levels of tolerance for violently moving air between plains and trains so that they can operate safely is significantly large.
Yep, weather conditions in western Europe tend to be a lot milder than the east coast of the US.
It's old fashioned ad-hominem as used by big business since capitalism and PR began. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.c... It isn't effective at countering the critical journalism per se but it gives the pro-corporate, pro-silicon valley media something to distract us from the real issues.
Gladwell should learn how to read and interpret research properly and also, as a non-scientist himself, learn to ask the researchers if his conclusions reflect the findings of the research. With his "10,000 hour rule" he most definitely failed to do this and he got it spectacularly wrong. If I can remember correctly, he based it on one paper on one study, investigating practice habits of violinists at a music college in (Berlin?) Germany. One paper doesn't make an adequate foundation for a generalisable conclusion, especially in the social sciences. The standard deviation in this study was huge and 10,000 hours was simply the average. In other words, some violinists practice many more than 10,000 hours to reach mastery, while some didn't no matter how many hours they practiced, but more importantly, some reached mastery in far fewer than 10,000 hours.
Something that should ring alarm bells in your head when you read stuff like the 10,000 hours rule, and Gladwell when he writes this stuff, is that such simple, broad generalised "rules" are rare in the natural sciences and almost non-existent in the social sciences. Simply put, listening to Gladwell is a waste of time because he has neither the background knowledge and skills, nor the humilty to ask for help in critically analysing his own conclusions. But who cares when you can sell a lot of books? Never let facts and more knowledgeable people than yourself get in the way of a good story.
From now on, all computer games for distribution in the Swedish market will feature two women, Lina and Anneli, talking to each other about something other than men. Perhaps they can follow you around in GTA commenting on and discussing your actions from a critical feminism perspective?
I think you mean squid. Octopus isn't usually deep fried although it is grilled, steamed, boiled, pickled, and shallow fried, AFAIK.
Agreed. This looks more like a simple, straightforward combing through the data and looking for correlations. Take a small sample size first, find correlations and then apply it to a larger data set. Researchers have been doing this for decades, long before there was any such thing as "machine learning." i guess recursive algorithm doesn't catch the press' attention as much.
A quicker, simpler, easier (administratively, at least) solution is to close the massive tax loopholes and govt. subsidies that the fossil energy industry enjoys. If alternative energy got even half the level of support the fossil energy giants did, we'd live in a cleaner, safer, more stable world.
And yes, decent integrated public mass-transportation makes commuting and everyday moving around so much less stressful and more spontaneous. When living in Europe, the cost and convenience of getting from A to B on a daily basis was never an issue. Even Moscow's quicker, easier, and cheaper than N. American cities (And Moscow is one of the most expensive cities in the world to live in).
...because M$ always has to be different and effectively proprietary. I've been using WebRTC for weeks now and it works fine. I'm on Linux and it works on every browser I've tried; Firefox, Chromium, and Opera (developer). It works on Windows too in every browser except IE (any version). Try it for yourself for free and no need to sign up or anything: https://appear.in/ (There's multiple other demos out there on the web to try too).
Do you think M$ are afraid of users migrating to more hassle-free and universally useful/cross-compatible versions of VoIP if they see how easy it is?
Yeah, teh Germans, the French, the Spanish, the UK (only as an extension of the French system up to London), and China seem to be investing is alternative energy friendly, i.e. electricity, public infrastructure. Not only this, with extreme weather events on the rise, flying is going to get more and more difficult. I haven't heard of trains being stopped by wind, snow, rain, etc..
OK, in the UK, a few leaves on the tracks or a tiny bit of snow make the commuter trains in the south east grind to a halt but that doesn't seem to happen elsewhere in the UK where there's more snow and ice and maybe leaves.
Is someone here trying to imply that out elected leaders need to be competent? What nonsense! They only have to be compliant and obedient to their lords and masters on Wall Street, fossil fuels, defence contractors, big pharma, and big ag (Who did I miss?). They'll ensure that the "right" legislation gets written for them to pass by ALEC and other similar organisations.
Hey, it could work in the people's favor though. What if thousands went on a campaign to click the "terr'ist" button on all the articles having to do with Cameron himself?
What Cameron a radical terrorist? Who've you been talking to? What have they told you? He definitely isn't a terrorist. All those people he's ordered summarily executed, extraordinarily rendered, tortured, and sexually abused are the terrorists. He's keeping us safe from them. If they weren't running from our drones and death squads, they'd be out protesting and demanding democratic representation in their own countries!
Here's the problem with paying poverty wages for increasingly larger numbers of workers in a nutshell: http://therealnews.com/t2/inde...
tl;dw - If workers are on poverty wages, who's going to buy the stuff they're making? (Rich people don't consume enough to make up for the massive shortfall)
Re: " for a length of time before transitioning to a better position, either within the company or at another." -- So what jobs are the 1,000,000+ Walmart workers going to transfer to? An don't forget all the fast food workers and other "temporary" poverty-wage jobs. Where are those "better jobs"? What is Walmart's track record of its workers going on to "better jobs" in reality? How well is this supposed strategy working, assuming that it isn't a post-hoc rationalisation to support an incoherent opinion?
Dichotomy-based arguments are the refuge of the scoundrel. In real life, they don't exist. There's always more than two options and two possible outcomes. According to non-neoliberal economists, raising the minimum wage doesn't result in fewer jobs and there's empirical evidence to show that it's not hypothetical speculation. Apparently, the net effect of raising wages, within reason, is to generate further economic activity which in turn creates more jobs.
It's not just lefties who understand this. You can hear it from a successful billionnaire if you prefer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (BTW, TED Talks tried to suppress this talk. Does this make it flaimbait too?)
Stop believing in what you hear on Fox. It doesn't help anyone in the longer term.
So we're resorting to anecdotal evidence and emotional arguments: "If I can work 80 hours a week for chicken feed and feed a family of five on a poverty wage, why can't everyone else?"
I don't want to be a part of the cruel world you live in.