This is/. Where a reasonable discussion is easily avoided by a simple flame bait moderation. Why introduce facts when you can simply dismiss another's POV?
The assumption that correlation implies causation is a common mistake. Real analysis, with a going in assumption the data is incomplete and inaccurate and thus any conclusions must be viewed as suspect is what's needed. Being able to keep competing hypothesis in one's mind and not blindly believing in the data is key to using it properly. Simply accepting the results because it's what the computer said is a pathetic to ruin. It's simply an extension of the cashier who says " Yes, that TV is a dollar because etaht's waht my computer disguised as a cash register says it is and tghus I cannot question it.
An anecdotal example where big data is useful is something I was involved in years ago. Some researchers were collecting data (sound of screeching tires, brake lights coming on, at intersections to predict where traffic engineers needed to focus efforts on making intersections safer before a bad crash occurred. The engineers had to use their knowledge and experience to determine how to make the intersection safer, not just put more cops writing tickets at them. They also looked at "safe" intersections to see if events bore out the analysis.
It's when you take out the human's judgement from the analysis that you run into problems.
Or in Target's case, when you fail to consider the potential ramifications of acting on the data.
There is no competition with private enterprise, because private enterprise has decided it's not cost-efficient to operate in that area - but they don't want anyone else operating there either, including the government.
Yes, because God forbid government could do something better or that we don't want to do.
They really shouldn't pay top dollar at times when they can produce for less from other sources; which is the utilities argue net against net metering and why net metering returns should not be included in a total cost of ownership calculation.
I agree. But then most of the ROI I see solar do assumes net-metering.
Remove that and for most people, I suspect solar becomes a bad financial choice.
Sure, with battery backup on site and shifting power use across 24 or 48 hours using a battery, may solve the problem in the long run, the cost of that solution makes the problem worse, not better, at least for now.
I agree, which is why I think residential solar won't see significant adoption until the units are built in as part of the design during initial construction. That would greatly reduce installation costs as well as better integrate the design and functionality of the equipment.
While actual impacts may be zero, the real issue is the effect of a near miss on the pilot. I would not want to be on final and all of a sudden have a drone come into view. A pilot is busy enough without getting distracted by a dreone and having to make a split second decision on what to do to avoid a collision. Reasonable regulations to limit such occurrences is good, te problem is defining reasonable.
The biggest danger of a drone is the loose nut behind the controller.
A while back, RC helicopters were expensive and difficult to fly. Only serious folks did it.
Now, they are so cheap and easy to fly, that folks with too much money, and too little common sense can make a public nuisance of themselves.
That's always the problem. Idiots who refuse to follow reasonable rules designed to keep things safe wind up ruining it for everyone as regulations get written to deal with the random idiots and impact the reasonable hobbyists who want to enjoy their hobby without endangering others.
They really shouldn't pay top dollar at times when they can produce for less from other sources; which is the utilities argue net against net metering and why net metering returns should not be included in a total cost of ownership calculation.
Good point, I forgot about DC line losses. Your car charger comment, however , is spot on. Designing a solar installation as part of the structure could include ensuring it is cable of supplying a car charger, and use the power generated to charge a car when demand is likely low on the grid and thus avoid the situation where you are supplying grid power at a time when it is least needed and thus reimbursed at a low rate.
One of the limiting factors right now is residential solar is an add on, so you have to overcome the cost factor as well as the appearance factor in selling it. To really take off it should be designed in at construction, so the roof is designed to incorporate the panels as well as for ease of maintenance, a storage battery and inverter are built in as well and the wiring is designed for AC and DC operation. For example, wall plugs could provide standard AC as well as DC for devices via a USB plug, eliminating the need for wall warts. A higher voltage DC line and plug would be nice but given their really isn't a standard in wide use that would be less likely despite its advantages over AC to DC devices; such as having DC LED lights throughout the house, plug in and hard wired. If it were built in the costs would be lower and part of the purchase price.
Great points. Net metering is already starting to go away as utilities convince regulators that they shouldn't be paying peak prices for power they can buy or generate for less. My guess is step next thing will be for utilities to push to make solar installations interruptible sources of power for grid management. That would mean you couldn't be assured of the ability to sell excess power, even at a reduced cost.
The problem with 40+ years old studies on computer aided learning is the computing lanscape has changed so much since then they are mostly irrelevant. Even the University of Illinois at Urbana is making the shift offering on-line education.
Online is personalized expect in the simplest of senses; i.e. you get to chose your pace but the content and flow is the same for everyone.
To me, personalized learning requires some degree of tailoring the material to the student; and therein lies the challenge. Doing that get expensive quickly, and we have shown time and time again a lack of willingness to invest in education.
The one area I have seen personalized learning is in special education, where teachers create individualized instruction plans of reach student based on their ability to learn. Even then, it generally devolves into simply doing the same thing but slower or with an aide rather than a tailored learning plan; simply because when you have to do 15 of them their is simply not enough time to tailor them and the county sure as hell ain't paying for another teacher or two needed to really tailor and deliver the material. As a result, I doubt it ever catches on at the public school level. I have seen it in college, where you can take lab courses under a professor and do your own thing after you've mastered the basics.
Modern diesel electric boats are very quiet and pose a challenge to those
that worry about such things.
True, but I'm guessing this is one of their Romeo class because atsvwhich are quite old. At any rate, she would have had to snorkel at some point which would give away her location. That she hasn't doesn't bode well for her or her crew.
Did this vessel become inoperable in international waters? If NK wants to save face by not officially declaring this vessel as wrecked they cannot expect it to be left alone under the Protection of Military Remains Act. I'm sure many nations would like to get a peek at the inner workings of this vessel.
I doubt anyone is interested in it. It probably is an ancient Romeo class, sold to a lot of countries.
While that lead to her arrest, it was the act of chewing on candy in her mouth that was the initial cause.
Did you read the article you cited? The consumption of food in a metro station was the initial cause of a warning. The failure to produce identification and decision to just walk away was the cause of the arrest.
She was warned twice. Instead of stopping, she copped an attitude, spouted off to a cop, tried just walking away while being cited, and got busted for it.
I agree she acted stupidly, and he she stopped would probably only got a ticket,
No, had she stopped after getting the first warning, she would have walked away with a verbal warning. Because she acted as if she didn't care that she was breaking a law, she got a ticket.
While she was arrested for reusing to stop to be cited, the initial cause for the stop was eating on the Metro. Had she not walked away and insults date cop she probably would have gotten a warning. So I guess it comes down to what you define as "cause." To me, it's the initial act that results in the stop but I can see where you'd define the escalation of the incident as the cause.
It sounds like she was arrested for refusing the lawful orders of a police officer. She was asked to stop and produce identification so the officer could write a ticket (for something that is a ticketable offence) and refused, so she was arrested.
Seems perfectly legitimate to me. You don't get to walk away because you think the offence is silly, it is still an offence.
While that lead to her arrest, it was the act of chewing on candy in her mouth that was the initial cause. I agree she acted stupidly, and he she stopped would probably only got a ticket, but it's an example of how strict DC is on eating on the Metro. It could be worse, she could have been eating a french fry. http://abcnews.go.com/US/story... Now, if they'd just arrest people for standing on the left side of an escalator or in front of doors as you exit life would be grand. Now, if you know Oliver North, you might avoid arrest and just get a $10 fine...
Yeah, they want to keep the money they earned in their paychecks. How dare they? They think they're entitled to money just because they spend their days working for it? And just because their employer voluntarily offered the money in exchange for the work?
These rightist people have no idea how hard it is to get by for people who don't want to do anything for anyone.
More like "I don't want people to do X so I will outlaw it or refuse to do my job because I don't like X" when X has no impact on them, such as gay marriage. Or "people should not be free to change jobs and work for a competitor since I paid them to work for me so I'll pass laws to prevent them from entering into another voluntary agreement" As for keeping money, it's "I should get a government handout to build / locate/ buy something and / or protection from competitors because I create jobs so to hell with the free market philosophies I expose otherwise." Same whine, different bottle.
People who have made their lives in San Francisco, especially in the arts, have a right to stay where they are
And that sentiment, right there, is what's wrong with this country. A whiny sense of entitlement that makes claim to something scarce simply because they want it. This is especially amusing (or would be, if these people didn't vote) in its predictableness, coming from the usual lefty/artist/aging-or-rebooted-hippie sector. Ask those same breathless progressives if they think that, say, the people in a Kentucky coal mining town have a "right" to things staying exactly as they are.
The ironic thing is the right is as whiney and has the same sense of entitlement, just about different things.
I think any place with a tram/train system for mass transit lets you drink (or don't enforce it) on the trains, Vancouver is the same way, so is Tokyo. So long as you're not peeing on the seat or something.
Right to be forgotten...I can see the Slashdot rebellion against this article already.
What I find interesting in those who want a "right to be forgotten" and for it to be enforced beyond their borders also complain when some other country does things online or with data, that is perfectly legal under there laws, that impact their citizens. This of course, is not unique to the 'right to be forgotten' or any particular country or jurisdiction; all are equally hypocritical in that regard.
Slashdot Mirror
How is this flamebait?
This is /. Where a reasonable discussion is easily avoided by a simple flame bait moderation. Why introduce facts when you can simply dismiss another's POV?
From a financial point of view
How about from a user/consumer point of view?
This is /., where the 1% view the 99% as the great unwashed who are too stupid to really understand how the world really works.
Rather, it's how it is used
The assumption that correlation implies causation is a common mistake. Real analysis, with a going in assumption the data is incomplete and inaccurate and thus any conclusions must be viewed as suspect is what's needed. Being able to keep competing hypothesis in one's mind and not blindly believing in the data is key to using it properly. Simply accepting the results because it's what the computer said is a pathetic to ruin. It's simply an extension of the cashier who says " Yes, that TV is a dollar because etaht's waht my computer disguised as a cash register says it is and tghus I cannot question it.
An anecdotal example where big data is useful is something I was involved in years ago. Some researchers were collecting data (sound of screeching tires, brake lights coming on, at intersections to predict where traffic engineers needed to focus efforts on making intersections safer before a bad crash occurred. The engineers had to use their knowledge and experience to determine how to make the intersection safer, not just put more cops writing tickets at them. They also looked at "safe" intersections to see if events bore out the analysis.
It's when you take out the human's judgement from the analysis that you run into problems.
Or in Target's case, when you fail to consider the potential ramifications of acting on the data.
I think I dodged a bullet there.
Having lived in Texas there is more truth in that statement than you probably intended.
You seem to be missing a very big point here.
There is no competition with private enterprise, because private enterprise has decided it's not cost-efficient to operate in that area - but they don't want anyone else operating there either, including the government.
Yes, because God forbid government could do something better or that we don't want to do.
Federal supremecy = The sates are preventing us from doing what we want
Yeah! Because we know that regulation stops stupidity!!!
No, but at least you can put the stupid out of their misery.
They really shouldn't pay top dollar at times when they can produce for less from other sources; which is the utilities argue net against net metering and why net metering returns should not be included in a total cost of ownership calculation.
I agree. But then most of the ROI I see solar do assumes net-metering.
Remove that and for most people, I suspect solar becomes a bad financial choice.
Sure, with battery backup on site and shifting power use across 24 or 48 hours using a battery, may solve the problem in the long run, the cost of that solution makes the problem worse, not better, at least for now.
I agree, which is why I think residential solar won't see significant adoption until the units are built in as part of the design during initial construction. That would greatly reduce installation costs as well as better integrate the design and functionality of the equipment.
While actual impacts may be zero, the real issue is the effect of a near miss on the pilot. I would not want to be on final and all of a sudden have a drone come into view. A pilot is busy enough without getting distracted by a dreone and having to make a split second decision on what to do to avoid a collision. Reasonable regulations to limit such occurrences is good, te problem is defining reasonable.
The biggest danger of a drone is the loose nut behind the controller.
A while back, RC helicopters were expensive and difficult to fly. Only serious folks did it.
Now, they are so cheap and easy to fly, that folks with too much money, and too little common sense can make a public nuisance of themselves.
That's always the problem. Idiots who refuse to follow reasonable rules designed to keep things safe wind up ruining it for everyone as regulations get written to deal with the random idiots and impact the reasonable hobbyists who want to enjoy their hobby without endangering others.
They really shouldn't pay top dollar at times when they can produce for less from other sources; which is the utilities argue net against net metering and why net metering returns should not be included in a total cost of ownership calculation.
Good point, I forgot about DC line losses. Your car charger comment, however , is spot on. Designing a solar installation as part of the structure could include ensuring it is cable of supplying a car charger, and use the power generated to charge a car when demand is likely low on the grid and thus avoid the situation where you are supplying grid power at a time when it is least needed and thus reimbursed at a low rate.
One of the limiting factors right now is residential solar is an add on, so you have to overcome the cost factor as well as the appearance factor in selling it. To really take off it should be designed in at construction, so the roof is designed to incorporate the panels as well as for ease of maintenance, a storage battery and inverter are built in as well and the wiring is designed for AC and DC operation. For example, wall plugs could provide standard AC as well as DC for devices via a USB plug, eliminating the need for wall warts. A higher voltage DC line and plug would be nice but given their really isn't a standard in wide use that would be less likely despite its advantages over AC to DC devices; such as having DC LED lights throughout the house, plug in and hard wired. If it were built in the costs would be lower and part of the purchase price.
And you'll always get net-metering.
Great points. Net metering is already starting to go away as utilities convince regulators that they shouldn't be paying peak prices for power they can buy or generate for less. My guess is step next thing will be for utilities to push to make solar installations interruptible sources of power for grid management. That would mean you couldn't be assured of the ability to sell excess power, even at a reduced cost.
Hey, being rich automatically makes you an expert on everything, just ask Donald Trump...
The problem with 40+ years old studies on computer aided learning is the computing lanscape has changed so much since then they are mostly irrelevant. Even the University of Illinois at Urbana is making the shift offering on-line education.
Online is personalized expect in the simplest of senses; i.e. you get to chose your pace but the content and flow is the same for everyone.
To me, personalized learning requires some degree of tailoring the material to the student; and therein lies the challenge. Doing that get expensive quickly, and we have shown time and time again a lack of willingness to invest in education.
The one area I have seen personalized learning is in special education, where teachers create individualized instruction plans of reach student based on their ability to learn. Even then, it generally devolves into simply doing the same thing but slower or with an aide rather than a tailored learning plan; simply because when you have to do 15 of them their is simply not enough time to tailor them and the county sure as hell ain't paying for another teacher or two needed to really tailor and deliver the material. As a result, I doubt it ever catches on at the public school level. I have seen it in college, where you can take lab courses under a professor and do your own thing after you've mastered the basics.
Modern diesel electric boats are very quiet and pose a challenge to those that worry about such things.
True, but I'm guessing this is one of their Romeo class because atsvwhich are quite old. At any rate, she would have had to snorkel at some point which would give away her location. That she hasn't doesn't bode well for her or her crew.
Did this vessel become inoperable in international waters? If NK wants to save face by not officially declaring this vessel as wrecked they cannot expect it to be left alone under the Protection of Military Remains Act. I'm sure many nations would like to get a peek at the inner workings of this vessel.
I doubt anyone is interested in it. It probably is an ancient Romeo class, sold to a lot of countries.
While that lead to her arrest, it was the act of chewing on candy in her mouth that was the initial cause.
Did you read the article you cited? The consumption of food in a metro station was the initial cause of a warning. The failure to produce identification and decision to just walk away was the cause of the arrest.
She was warned twice. Instead of stopping, she copped an attitude, spouted off to a cop, tried just walking away while being cited, and got busted for it.
I agree she acted stupidly, and he she stopped would probably only got a ticket,
No, had she stopped after getting the first warning, she would have walked away with a verbal warning. Because she acted as if she didn't care that she was breaking a law, she got a ticket.
While she was arrested for reusing to stop to be cited, the initial cause for the stop was eating on the Metro. Had she not walked away and insults date cop she probably would have gotten a warning. So I guess it comes down to what you define as "cause." To me, it's the initial act that results in the stop but I can see where you'd define the escalation of the incident as the cause.
It sounds like she was arrested for refusing the lawful orders of a police officer. She was asked to stop and produce identification so the officer could write a ticket (for something that is a ticketable offence) and refused, so she was arrested.
Seems perfectly legitimate to me. You don't get to walk away because you think the offence is silly, it is still an offence.
While that lead to her arrest, it was the act of chewing on candy in her mouth that was the initial cause. I agree she acted stupidly, and he she stopped would probably only got a ticket, but it's an example of how strict DC is on eating on the Metro. It could be worse, she could have been eating a french fry. http://abcnews.go.com/US/story... Now, if they'd just arrest people for standing on the left side of an escalator or in front of doors as you exit life would be grand. Now, if you know Oliver North, you might avoid arrest and just get a $10 fine...
Yeah, they want to keep the money they earned in their paychecks. How dare they? They think they're entitled to money just because they spend their days working for it? And just because their employer voluntarily offered the money in exchange for the work?
These rightist people have no idea how hard it is to get by for people who don't want to do anything for anyone.
More like "I don't want people to do X so I will outlaw it or refuse to do my job because I don't like X" when X has no impact on them, such as gay marriage. Or "people should not be free to change jobs and work for a competitor since I paid them to work for me so I'll pass laws to prevent them from entering into another voluntary agreement" As for keeping money, it's "I should get a government handout to build / locate/ buy something and / or protection from competitors because I create jobs so to hell with the free market philosophies I expose otherwise." Same whine, different bottle.
People who have made their lives in San Francisco, especially in the arts, have a right to stay where they are
And that sentiment, right there, is what's wrong with this country. A whiny sense of entitlement that makes claim to something scarce simply because they want it. This is especially amusing (or would be, if these people didn't vote) in its predictableness, coming from the usual lefty/artist/aging-or-rebooted-hippie sector. Ask those same breathless progressives if they think that, say, the people in a Kentucky coal mining town have a "right" to things staying exactly as they are.
The ironic thing is the right is as whiney and has the same sense of entitlement, just about different things.
I think any place with a tram/train system for mass transit lets you drink (or don't enforce it) on the trains, Vancouver is the same way, so is Tokyo. So long as you're not peeing on the seat or something.
DC is pretty strict - even a candy bar can get you arrested. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Right to be forgotten...I can see the Slashdot rebellion against this article already.
What I find interesting in those who want a "right to be forgotten" and for it to be enforced beyond their borders also complain when some other country does things online or with data, that is perfectly legal under there laws, that impact their citizens. This of course, is not unique to the 'right to be forgotten' or any particular country or jurisdiction; all are equally hypocritical in that regard.
Wrong, Ford Bought Shelby from the estate after Carol died.
According to the Shelby website Ford is a licensee and they have a relationship with Ford, no mention of a purchase. I could be wrong, got a link?