Does anyone really think Apple designed the building? They conferred with architectural design firms with their image in mind. The firm they chose should've accounted for snow; the building permit office and inspectors should never have cleared a building with a sub-standard roof for Chicago weather. I hate Apple as much as the next person, but let's stop stroking our dicks over something that's hardly Apple's fault.
You keep making money? You must be selling before you hit the peak of the bubble and missing out on even better returns. But, like all bubbles, most will try to eek out a few more percent and eat it when this pump-and-dump finally bursts.
Anyone have a link for his kickstarter, or whatever? I'm generally not one to promote suicide, but this guy seems adamant on using his homemade rocket to kill himself in a most spectacular fashion. I mean, if this is what he really wants as his dying act, who am I to deny him? Hell, maybe we can help him along with his goal?
I think this ignores the secrecy behind the ME in the first place. Wake-on-LAN has been a common function for, seemingly, ever, and is well-known, whereas the capabilities, even the existence, of the ME has just come out recently. If it was meant for powering up for such sundry tasks as you mention, why has it gone undocumented and unrealized for so long? You can't blame that on shoddy marketing.
Rather, the ME has been *purposefully* kept secret, which forces one to ask why? The obviousness is that it's a hardware backdoor for intelligence/LEO purposes, which is precisely who has used it the most.
Simply, the *potential* we have at our fingertips, with respect to computers, etc, is VAST. Our knowledge of how to use those systems, however, barely scratches the surface of the surface.
When someone with greater knowledge of those systems comes along and makes the layperson look like a digital chump, bad things tend to happen: either the more knowledgeable seeks to "break" the system, using it for something the laypeople don't tend to think the system can do, or the laypeople get bent out of shape with their ignorance displayed for all to see. In the latter case, people get defensive, try to implement rules and regulations to return the use of those systems back to their own comfort level...
"This means that M.I.T. graduate students would be responsible for paying taxes on an $80,000 annual salary, when we actually earn $33,000 a year. That's an increase of our tax burden by at least $10,000 annually."
Take your education to Europe, where intellectualism isn't dead. Watch the rest of the brain-drain from afar.
Will FB be able to fix the obvious and simple dodge: minor changes to the file completely change the hash, making hash-matching filters almost meaningless.
Not that I expect much from macrumors.com besides self-stroking masturbation, but it's funny to see them flex *Apple* in the headline instead of, you know, *Samsung*, who developed the damn screen. Instead, those who should get the credit for the innovation are given second billing...That's just limp.
Telecommuting works for those with the work ethic and maturity to actually get work done from home. Most people are likely to do just the bare minimum to keep from getting fired. Despite the same job if they're sitting in an office, the same people will be more productive than they would be working from the kitchen table. Since firms want as much productivity for as low a cost, why pay someone the same for less productivity to work from home?
In my experience telecommuting is a privilege extended to those in the workplace that have shown they can perform. I've also seen those who couldn't and ruin such a policy for everyone else.
So, pretty much jack up the cost of individual repairs to coerce users to pay for AppleCare...Alright..just wanted to make sure I was reading that correctly...
I would suggest a non-trivial subset of the training dataset encountered words like "homo" and "gay" in negative, colloquial contexts and likely couldn't discern the idiomatic usage. For example, if gaming chat windows provided any input for the training set, it wouldn't be unreasonable to see something like "stop spawn-camping you fucking fag" and the like wend its way into the dataset.
The sentiment analyzer reflects how average people use language, so the perception of the sentiment analyzer will be through that average user's use of language. If the average person is a bigoted idiot, the sentiment analyzer's interpretations will be those of a bigoted idiot.
Poor writing about science-related things makes for a poor message. The article gives the suggestion that Google's at fault for the negative perception of its sentiment analyzer, which tells me the reporter, and most laypeople, have no idea how these forms of AI work. That, in itself, isn't necessarily a problem, but it shows that the tone of an article can manipulate the reader in inappropriate ways.
These kinds of classification routines are based on the training of a given dataset. As such, how the information in that dataset is structures will influence the resulting trained model. Google didn't set out to craft a bigoted sentiment analyzer; the analyzer simply reached that conclusion based on the, likely very large, dataset Google used to train the API. Looking at how people use language on the Internet, I'm not surprised at all by the outcome. A similar outcome can be seen in the chatbot created by Microsoft that ended up a dumpster fire within 24 hours. Granted, the training methods may be different between the two, the nature of the underlying dataset, language use (primarily on the Internet) are very similar.
What Google did was create a sentiment analyzer based on how the average person uses language. If that means certain negative sentiment is elicited from terms like "Jew" or "homosexual", that speaks far more about the underlying dataset and less about the sentiment analyzer.
The irony about "sending a message to the establishment" needs to be explained to them...
If voting for Trump was really an anti-establishment vote, ask them why 90%+ of re-running incumbents got re-elected? Don't let anyone try to fool you with the "anti-establishment vote" excuse.
People voted for Trump because their motives align more with him than they did with Clinton. That's all it comes down to. Seeing what Trump's motives are, that should make you feel more than just a bit queasy.
Intel acquired Movidius, and they released their "neural compute stick" with dedicated hardware for convolutional neural networks. It wouldn't surprise me if this has made its way into the Pixel.
That's a secondary benefit. The primary benefit is the belief that people perform better when there's oversight. For that to be effective, however, the oversight has to actually be there. Individuals who know they're on camera will tend to behave better, be they civilians or officers. Of course, if the footage is being archived without being processed, cops will begin to realize there are no repercussions for bad behaviour even when it's recorded, so without oversight, you'll see a slide back to old patterns of behaviour.
A massive problem facing police departments is the storage and processing of that much video. Police departments don't have the resources to run a datacenter, nor the expertise to do so. Video's complex, so you need people with the know-how to analyze and categorize video. So many obvious data-handling problems arise with such a system that it makes me think they were overlooked intentionally so that, ultimately, implementation will fail in the long run.
To your point, it does make investigating a complaint easier if there's a timestamped video of the event in question. The initial point, however, is to change behaviour to reduce the number of incidents in the first place. How the project is implemented will determine how well that succeeds.
Of course a signature isn't a fraud *prevention* mechanism...it never was, unless the early days of credit cards saw vendors having databases of customer signatures against which to compare. The signature is there for fraud *investigation*. If you argue that your identity's been stolen, the firm investigates, pulls up the purchase slip with a signature that doesn't match yours, BINGO...they know you're not bullshitting.
Since it's likely that $90 mil is linked to the stock price of Equifax, a concerted effort to erode the stock value of the company seems to be in order. Cost the shareholders that supported such a shoddy corporate culture to allow such a breach.
Businesses rally behind the "free market" when it suits then, but when that same free market bites them in the ass, they run crying to the government for relief.
I'm interested to know why costs in the US are so high. One could decry cheap labour from China and Mexico, but in that case, why is South Korea included in the list of countries that are keeping prices down? Moreover, solar panel manufacturing is a largely-automated process, pushing labour costs down even more...
Apple has lobbied against "Fair Repair" bills in 11 states that would require the company to make its repair guides available and to sell replacement parts to the general public. Instead, it has focused on an "authorized service provider" model that allows the company to control the price and availability of repair.
I can understand wanting only authorized techs working on their product, but it's a MASSIVE leap to go from that to lobbying in 11 states against "Fair Repair" bills.
So, you want product XYZ without "features" ABC...Apple offers you XYZ *with* ABC...It looks like Apple's not giving you the product you want.
Company not giving you the product you want? DON'T BUY IT.
I'm not surprised by this conclusion. Traditionally, men have faced harsher conditions, either in terms of being hunters in hunter-gatherer societies, or in terms of workplace dangers in the wage-slave world. Such harsh conditions, as well as trauma from interacting with such conditions, can have a direct impact on DNA (say, from greater exposure to damaging chemicals in the workplace). It's no surprise men may face a higher possibility of genetic mutations.
If you adopt open-source software as an underlying framework for your system which stores highly sensitive information, then you take all the time you need to audit the code to ensure that your highly-sensitive information is secure before you go live.
It's *the firm's* responsibility to ensure their infrastructure is secure, not anyone else, and if they decide to use infrastructure X on a production server, the outcomes are on *their* ass.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this just shows the dangers of relying on market cap as the defining factor regarding the value of, well, anything...
Does anyone really think Apple designed the building? They conferred with architectural design firms with their image in mind. The firm they chose should've accounted for snow; the building permit office and inspectors should never have cleared a building with a sub-standard roof for Chicago weather. I hate Apple as much as the next person, but let's stop stroking our dicks over something that's hardly Apple's fault.
You keep making money? You must be selling before you hit the peak of the bubble and missing out on even better returns. But, like all bubbles, most will try to eek out a few more percent and eat it when this pump-and-dump finally bursts.
Anyone have a link for his kickstarter, or whatever? I'm generally not one to promote suicide, but this guy seems adamant on using his homemade rocket to kill himself in a most spectacular fashion. I mean, if this is what he really wants as his dying act, who am I to deny him? Hell, maybe we can help him along with his goal?
I think this ignores the secrecy behind the ME in the first place. Wake-on-LAN has been a common function for, seemingly, ever, and is well-known, whereas the capabilities, even the existence, of the ME has just come out recently. If it was meant for powering up for such sundry tasks as you mention, why has it gone undocumented and unrealized for so long? You can't blame that on shoddy marketing.
Rather, the ME has been *purposefully* kept secret, which forces one to ask why? The obviousness is that it's a hardware backdoor for intelligence/LEO purposes, which is precisely who has used it the most.
Funny how the chest-thumpers of modern capitalism sob into their hands when the free market does something they *don't* like...
Simply, the *potential* we have at our fingertips, with respect to computers, etc, is VAST. Our knowledge of how to use those systems, however, barely scratches the surface of the surface.
When someone with greater knowledge of those systems comes along and makes the layperson look like a digital chump, bad things tend to happen: either the more knowledgeable seeks to "break" the system, using it for something the laypeople don't tend to think the system can do, or the laypeople get bent out of shape with their ignorance displayed for all to see. In the latter case, people get defensive, try to implement rules and regulations to return the use of those systems back to their own comfort level...
"This means that M.I.T. graduate students would be responsible for paying taxes on an $80,000 annual salary, when we actually earn $33,000 a year. That's an increase of our tax burden by at least $10,000 annually."
Take your education to Europe, where intellectualism isn't dead. Watch the rest of the brain-drain from afar.
Will FB be able to fix the obvious and simple dodge: minor changes to the file completely change the hash, making hash-matching filters almost meaningless.
Not that I expect much from macrumors.com besides self-stroking masturbation, but it's funny to see them flex *Apple* in the headline instead of, you know, *Samsung*, who developed the damn screen. Instead, those who should get the credit for the innovation are given second billing...That's just limp.
Telecommuting works for those with the work ethic and maturity to actually get work done from home. Most people are likely to do just the bare minimum to keep from getting fired. Despite the same job if they're sitting in an office, the same people will be more productive than they would be working from the kitchen table. Since firms want as much productivity for as low a cost, why pay someone the same for less productivity to work from home?
In my experience telecommuting is a privilege extended to those in the workplace that have shown they can perform. I've also seen those who couldn't and ruin such a policy for everyone else.
So, pretty much jack up the cost of individual repairs to coerce users to pay for AppleCare...Alright..just wanted to make sure I was reading that correctly...
I would suggest a non-trivial subset of the training dataset encountered words like "homo" and "gay" in negative, colloquial contexts and likely couldn't discern the idiomatic usage. For example, if gaming chat windows provided any input for the training set, it wouldn't be unreasonable to see something like "stop spawn-camping you fucking fag" and the like wend its way into the dataset.
The sentiment analyzer reflects how average people use language, so the perception of the sentiment analyzer will be through that average user's use of language. If the average person is a bigoted idiot, the sentiment analyzer's interpretations will be those of a bigoted idiot.
Poor writing about science-related things makes for a poor message. The article gives the suggestion that Google's at fault for the negative perception of its sentiment analyzer, which tells me the reporter, and most laypeople, have no idea how these forms of AI work. That, in itself, isn't necessarily a problem, but it shows that the tone of an article can manipulate the reader in inappropriate ways.
These kinds of classification routines are based on the training of a given dataset. As such, how the information in that dataset is structures will influence the resulting trained model. Google didn't set out to craft a bigoted sentiment analyzer; the analyzer simply reached that conclusion based on the, likely very large, dataset Google used to train the API. Looking at how people use language on the Internet, I'm not surprised at all by the outcome. A similar outcome can be seen in the chatbot created by Microsoft that ended up a dumpster fire within 24 hours. Granted, the training methods may be different between the two, the nature of the underlying dataset, language use (primarily on the Internet) are very similar.
What Google did was create a sentiment analyzer based on how the average person uses language. If that means certain negative sentiment is elicited from terms like "Jew" or "homosexual", that speaks far more about the underlying dataset and less about the sentiment analyzer.
The irony about "sending a message to the establishment" needs to be explained to them...
If voting for Trump was really an anti-establishment vote, ask them why 90%+ of re-running incumbents got re-elected? Don't let anyone try to fool you with the "anti-establishment vote" excuse.
People voted for Trump because their motives align more with him than they did with Clinton. That's all it comes down to. Seeing what Trump's motives are, that should make you feel more than just a bit queasy.
Intel acquired Movidius, and they released their "neural compute stick" with dedicated hardware for convolutional neural networks. It wouldn't surprise me if this has made its way into the Pixel.
That's a secondary benefit. The primary benefit is the belief that people perform better when there's oversight. For that to be effective, however, the oversight has to actually be there. Individuals who know they're on camera will tend to behave better, be they civilians or officers. Of course, if the footage is being archived without being processed, cops will begin to realize there are no repercussions for bad behaviour even when it's recorded, so without oversight, you'll see a slide back to old patterns of behaviour.
A massive problem facing police departments is the storage and processing of that much video. Police departments don't have the resources to run a datacenter, nor the expertise to do so. Video's complex, so you need people with the know-how to analyze and categorize video. So many obvious data-handling problems arise with such a system that it makes me think they were overlooked intentionally so that, ultimately, implementation will fail in the long run.
To your point, it does make investigating a complaint easier if there's a timestamped video of the event in question. The initial point, however, is to change behaviour to reduce the number of incidents in the first place. How the project is implemented will determine how well that succeeds.
Of course a signature isn't a fraud *prevention* mechanism...it never was, unless the early days of credit cards saw vendors having databases of customer signatures against which to compare. The signature is there for fraud *investigation*. If you argue that your identity's been stolen, the firm investigates, pulls up the purchase slip with a signature that doesn't match yours, BINGO...they know you're not bullshitting.
If this is to be the new focus of NASA, how about shoveling the money they need their way?
Since it's likely that $90 mil is linked to the stock price of Equifax, a concerted effort to erode the stock value of the company seems to be in order. Cost the shareholders that supported such a shoddy corporate culture to allow such a breach.
Businesses rally behind the "free market" when it suits then, but when that same free market bites them in the ass, they run crying to the government for relief.
I'm interested to know why costs in the US are so high. One could decry cheap labour from China and Mexico, but in that case, why is South Korea included in the list of countries that are keeping prices down? Moreover, solar panel manufacturing is a largely-automated process, pushing labour costs down even more...
Sounds like mismanagement to me...
Apple has lobbied against "Fair Repair" bills in 11 states that would require the company to make its repair guides available and to sell replacement parts to the general public. Instead, it has focused on an "authorized service provider" model that allows the company to control the price and availability of repair.
I can understand wanting only authorized techs working on their product, but it's a MASSIVE leap to go from that to lobbying in 11 states against "Fair Repair" bills.
So, you want product XYZ without "features" ABC...Apple offers you XYZ *with* ABC...It looks like Apple's not giving you the product you want. Company not giving you the product you want? DON'T BUY IT.
I'm not surprised by this conclusion. Traditionally, men have faced harsher conditions, either in terms of being hunters in hunter-gatherer societies, or in terms of workplace dangers in the wage-slave world. Such harsh conditions, as well as trauma from interacting with such conditions, can have a direct impact on DNA (say, from greater exposure to damaging chemicals in the workplace). It's no surprise men may face a higher possibility of genetic mutations.
If you adopt open-source software as an underlying framework for your system which stores highly sensitive information, then you take all the time you need to audit the code to ensure that your highly-sensitive information is secure before you go live.
It's *the firm's* responsibility to ensure their infrastructure is secure, not anyone else, and if they decide to use infrastructure X on a production server, the outcomes are on *their* ass.