The summary example (Google scanning 4% of books), while it may be "a lot" of data, isn't really big data, is it? I understand the whole point about more data not necessarily being better, but here I don't even think the example shows proves the point?
I think the challenge of this heist, aside from the massive weights involved, would be the replacing of the quarters with beads - so you're not just taking quarters out of bags (putting them into other containers), but you're also bringing IN equivalent size/weight material to replace what you've stolen. That's a brute force hack!
to be clear, what SJWs are lauding is the overcoming of the very real barrier posed to women at senior levels when "every female CEO" is named.
You can't be so stupid to think that gender relates to success in management - either gender. But then again, seeing how you attack the liberal straw"man" in your post, perhaps you are.
Yes, he must be an idiot for using the generally accepted shorthand name that everyone recognizes, as opposed to you who have insightfully seen through the marketing BS. Although you did use marketing words like "Enterprise" rather than "scalable for large-business use" and "CTO" rather than "person in charge of all company technology," so perhaps you're just railing against a pet peeve of yours.
However, on the bright side, I am sure GE appreciates the awareness you have provided them that moving some of these apps is "probably" illegal. They're "probably" scrambling that one lawyer they have, to look at that.
I see this autonomy being helpful, like an autopilot control. I may be the one in control as I enter the highway, get to speed and merge, but once I'm in a lane, I may switch over to the autonomous system.
If I could +10 your comment, I would. As someone who works in content, it is a bane to my existence. It's stopped me from going to some sites altogether!
I think OP means that _IF_, due to a less expensive H1B hire, the company is able to post 2 jobs rather than their normal one, then the "one job lost" calculation is thrown off.
Perhaps a bit clunky explanation but I understood the post to indicate "there are a lot of variables that may factor in to this equation, for which a simple math calculation may not give an accurate picture."
The high debts incurred is not "a related problem" but rather the cause for "few US citizens...motivated to attain high levels of education."
Also, "If the market value of the dollar reflects its true worth.." leads you to a false "then" statement. By definition, the market value of the dollar does reflect its worth. And as long as USD are backed by reliable, stable economic fiat, that will continue. Of course, if you try to shut down the government via silly grandstanding, you might lose that, but then this discussion about immigration will be the least of your worries.
"Because boys get more informal opportunities for computing experience outside of school, this lack of formal computing education especially affects girls and many youth of color."
That has less to do with knowledge than how broken the screening system is. You've got to SEO your resume for the machines then add keywords for the HR people who pick up the ones that made it through.
Everything on a resume should tout skills gained, responsibilities held or accomplishments. Accomplishments are what employers look for most (hence the trend in behavioral interviewing). A GPA on a resume means you either don't have enough work experience or haven't done much else. If getting good grades is one of your top accomplishments, you haven't proven much yet in the real world.
Some of us are aware of US Wrestling - Burroughs, Ramos, Ruth...old school brothers like the Schultzs and Banachs...
I like how you say they're "good enough" to compete internationally. In the US, it's sometimes hard to remember that we aren't automatically the best at everything. But it's great to watch such great competitors.
You are so right about how it helps socialize... we hear in the news about US/Iran/Cuba/Russia, etc. politics, but you wouldn't know it watching the teams wrestle. Fierce competitors on the mat, respectful off.
I'm to old to wrestle too - but I keep sharp by coaching. It keeps you close to the energy without the pain!
Parent's comments allude to the fact that deniers will ignore the overwhelmingly accepted data that don't fit their world view. Your example alludes to the fact that some people will use the overwhelmingly accepted data to project a worst possible outcome.
Sure they are inaccurate (at least in the short term), but it's not like they're trying to refute the accepted science.
..which, from TFA it is - an act of economic desperation. Their currency loses 25% per year and trying to convert it to dollars takes time and huge fees - losing roughly 30%. If bitcoin provides a better, faster arbitrage, then it is, in this case, a more "reliable store of value."
I think it's more of a damning comment on Argentinian currency rather than a spotlight on the quality and fungibility of bitcoins.
Perhaps more accurately, the article could hypothesize that using social media to vent removes the people from venting in the streets - not reducing the anger, per se, but rather creating distance which could reduce actual violence.
Actually, it's cases like this that help define what constitutes rights and obligations for the plaintiff. To your example, corporations weren't automatically assumed to be people, but in the late 1800s cases were raised as to the validity of contracts held by corporations. The contracts were deemed valid, since the court ruled that people should not be deprived of their constitutional rights when they act collectively - therefore granting equal "rights" to corporations similar to individuals, in that narrowly defined context.
Corporations don't have wholesale similar rights to people. Currently a corporation cannot claim Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination (that has been ruled upon).
However, in 2010 the Supreme Court upheld the rights of corporations to make political expenditures under the First Amendment. This was ruled upon by today's more conservative and pro-business Supreme Court, and many have said this is over-reaching. Which, if enough people and resources raise it as an issue, it may be overturned, or (more likely) specifically added as a constitutional amendment to abolish this rule.
This is why there is so much hand-wringing over new Supreme Court justices - they are 1/3 of the government's balance of power, and they serve a lifetime. If there is a president and majority party in Congress, they can influence the law of the land far beyond their tenure by appointing new judges that fit their political POV....but I digress...
aaaah yes, the broad-brush analogizing that passes for informed discourse! (and no, I'm not new here).
"People" implies a majority (otherwise it wouldn't be relevant to your point): Research/data, please?
Yes, money worries aren't exclusively caused by low salaries (nice hedge, btw). But to use what amount to psychological outliers to dismiss what has become accepted discourse on wage inequality is faulty logic.
As an American, and one who doesn't own a gun, I'll chime in... I don't believe we're morons because we want to own guns, I believe we're morons because we think that owning a gun will keep us secure as individuals.
The point of having the freedom to own guns was as a check and balance against government or organized tyranny. For example, the fact that we had the right to bear arms was specifically mentioned by Admiral Yamamoto as to why Japan should not attack the US mainland.
However, today, the reasons given (by the gun lobby) seem to be heavily oriented toward individual protection. Since the U.S. is not going to be invaded by a traditional army any time soon, it's also subtly encouraged the paranoid belief of the tyranny of our existing government. I think this is illogical, but many today here don't.
IIRC, there are at least as many guns owned per capita in Switzerland. So it's not purely the ownership of guns that is dangerous. It's putting those guns in the hands of people who truly believe that the government is out to "steal" their way of life - by taxing them to pay for those "lazy" types who don't want to work, by "forcing" them to accept other religions and ways of life as at least equal to their own, by giving an "unfair" advantage to certain classes of people when it comes to work, and by "undermining" police forces who are accused of racism when they're "just doing their jobs" - all while there have been real and significant cuts to education and human services...that is what makes it dangerous.
This may not be true in the Netherlands, but in the U.S., I believe that the issue of where to draw the line is addressed by the government having the ultimate ability to redact any information that it considers to be of sensitive or proprietary nature. Of course, the flip side of this is that in some cases (in the U.S), redaction has included literally all of the information within the documents of the request, save page numbers and other inconsequential information - rendering the point of FOI requests useless.
This is the continuing struggle of democracy - balancing liberty & transparency with security* and confidentiality... and that's scary for a lot of individuals and governments.
*By "security" I mean keeping a government secure - from invasion, economic demise, attack, etc. rather than the more Orwellian "we're here to protect you which is why we must be involved in every aspect of your life."
Slashdot Mirror
The summary example (Google scanning 4% of books), while it may be "a lot" of data, isn't really big data, is it? I understand the whole point about more data not necessarily being better, but here I don't even think the example shows proves the point?
"there's not much Spam in it!"
I think the challenge of this heist, aside from the massive weights involved, would be the replacing of the quarters with beads - so you're not just taking quarters out of bags (putting them into other containers), but you're also bringing IN equivalent size/weight material to replace what you've stolen. That's a brute force hack!
yeah, try buying a Snickers bar with gold buillon and see how good it is. Currency needs fungibility as well as value.
to be clear, what SJWs are lauding is the overcoming of the very real barrier posed to women at senior levels when "every female CEO" is named.
You can't be so stupid to think that gender relates to success in management - either gender. But then again, seeing how you attack the liberal straw"man" in your post, perhaps you are.
Yes, he must be an idiot for using the generally accepted shorthand name that everyone recognizes, as opposed to you who have insightfully seen through the marketing BS. Although you did use marketing words like "Enterprise" rather than "scalable for large-business use" and "CTO" rather than "person in charge of all company technology," so perhaps you're just railing against a pet peeve of yours.
However, on the bright side, I am sure GE appreciates the awareness you have provided them that moving some of these apps is "probably" illegal. They're "probably" scrambling that one lawyer they have, to look at that.
I see this autonomy being helpful, like an autopilot control. I may be the one in control as I enter the highway, get to speed and merge, but once I'm in a lane, I may switch over to the autonomous system.
If I could +10 your comment, I would. As someone who works in content, it is a bane to my existence. It's stopped me from going to some sites altogether!
I think OP means that _IF_, due to a less expensive H1B hire, the company is able to post 2 jobs rather than their normal one, then the "one job lost" calculation is thrown off.
Perhaps a bit clunky explanation but I understood the post to indicate "there are a lot of variables that may factor in to this equation, for which a simple math calculation may not give an accurate picture."
Your second sentence: source, please?
The high debts incurred is not "a related problem" but rather the cause for "few US citizens...motivated to attain high levels of education."
Also, "If the market value of the dollar reflects its true worth.." leads you to a false "then" statement. By definition, the market value of the dollar does reflect its worth. And as long as USD are backed by reliable, stable economic fiat, that will continue. Of course, if you try to shut down the government via silly grandstanding, you might lose that, but then this discussion about immigration will be the least of your worries.
Because it's easier to sell advertising on the news that "something better is coming" rather than "the same old treatment still works."
yes, especially, because, according to TFA,
"Because boys get more informal opportunities for computing experience outside of school, this lack of formal computing education especially affects girls and many youth of color."
That has less to do with knowledge than how broken the screening system is. You've got to SEO your resume for the machines then add keywords for the HR people who pick up the ones that made it through.
It's the same logic one could apply to any First Amendment issue, or coding for that matter: "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
Umm, no.
Everything on a resume should tout skills gained, responsibilities held or accomplishments. Accomplishments are what employers look for most (hence the trend in behavioral interviewing). A GPA on a resume means you either don't have enough work experience or haven't done much else. If getting good grades is one of your top accomplishments, you haven't proven much yet in the real world.
Sincerely,
A better recruiter.
FYI, at least one Congressman thinks the NSA isn't collecting ENOUGH:
http://thehill.com/policy/nati...
Some of us are aware of US Wrestling - Burroughs, Ramos, Ruth...old school brothers like the Schultzs and Banachs...
I like how you say they're "good enough" to compete internationally. In the US, it's sometimes hard to remember that we aren't automatically the best at everything. But it's great to watch such great competitors.
You are so right about how it helps socialize... we hear in the news about US/Iran/Cuba/Russia, etc. politics, but you wouldn't know it watching the teams wrestle. Fierce competitors on the mat, respectful off.
I'm to old to wrestle too - but I keep sharp by coaching. It keeps you close to the energy without the pain!
Silly person.
Parent's comments allude to the fact that deniers will ignore the overwhelmingly accepted data that don't fit their world view. Your example alludes to the fact that some people will use the overwhelmingly accepted data to project a worst possible outcome.
Sure they are inaccurate (at least in the short term), but it's not like they're trying to refute the accepted science.
..which, from TFA it is - an act of economic desperation. Their currency loses 25% per year and trying to convert it to dollars takes time and huge fees - losing roughly 30%. If bitcoin provides a better, faster arbitrage, then it is, in this case, a more "reliable store of value."
I think it's more of a damning comment on Argentinian currency rather than a spotlight on the quality and fungibility of bitcoins.
Perhaps more accurately, the article could hypothesize that using social media to vent removes the people from venting in the streets - not reducing the anger, per se, but rather creating distance which could reduce actual violence.
Yeah, I'll be remembering A&M Galveston as a degree to NOT work for/with...
Actually, it's cases like this that help define what constitutes rights and obligations for the plaintiff. To your example, corporations weren't automatically assumed to be people, but in the late 1800s cases were raised as to the validity of contracts held by corporations. The contracts were deemed valid, since the court ruled that people should not be deprived of their constitutional rights when they act collectively - therefore granting equal "rights" to corporations similar to individuals, in that narrowly defined context.
Corporations don't have wholesale similar rights to people. Currently a corporation cannot claim Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination (that has been ruled upon).
However, in 2010 the Supreme Court upheld the rights of corporations to make political expenditures under the First Amendment. This was ruled upon by today's more conservative and pro-business Supreme Court, and many have said this is over-reaching. Which, if enough people and resources raise it as an issue, it may be overturned, or (more likely) specifically added as a constitutional amendment to abolish this rule.
This is why there is so much hand-wringing over new Supreme Court justices - they are 1/3 of the government's balance of power, and they serve a lifetime. If there is a president and majority party in Congress, they can influence the law of the land far beyond their tenure by appointing new judges that fit their political POV. ...but I digress...
aaaah yes, the broad-brush analogizing that passes for informed discourse! (and no, I'm not new here).
"People" implies a majority (otherwise it wouldn't be relevant to your point): Research/data, please?
Yes, money worries aren't exclusively caused by low salaries (nice hedge, btw). But to use what amount to psychological outliers to dismiss what has become accepted discourse on wage inequality is faulty logic.
As an American, and one who doesn't own a gun, I'll chime in... I don't believe we're morons because we want to own guns, I believe we're morons because we think that owning a gun will keep us secure as individuals.
The point of having the freedom to own guns was as a check and balance against government or organized tyranny. For example, the fact that we had the right to bear arms was specifically mentioned by Admiral Yamamoto as to why Japan should not attack the US mainland.
However, today, the reasons given (by the gun lobby) seem to be heavily oriented toward individual protection. Since the U.S. is not going to be invaded by a traditional army any time soon, it's also subtly encouraged the paranoid belief of the tyranny of our existing government. I think this is illogical, but many today here don't.
IIRC, there are at least as many guns owned per capita in Switzerland. So it's not purely the ownership of guns that is dangerous. It's putting those guns in the hands of people who truly believe that the government is out to "steal" their way of life - by taxing them to pay for those "lazy" types who don't want to work, by "forcing" them to accept other religions and ways of life as at least equal to their own, by giving an "unfair" advantage to certain classes of people when it comes to work, and by "undermining" police forces who are accused of racism when they're "just doing their jobs" - all while there have been real and significant cuts to education and human services...that is what makes it dangerous.
This may not be true in the Netherlands, but in the U.S., I believe that the issue of where to draw the line is addressed by the government having the ultimate ability to redact any information that it considers to be of sensitive or proprietary nature. Of course, the flip side of this is that in some cases (in the U.S), redaction has included literally all of the information within the documents of the request, save page numbers and other inconsequential information - rendering the point of FOI requests useless.
This is the continuing struggle of democracy - balancing liberty & transparency with security* and confidentiality... and that's scary for a lot of individuals and governments.
*By "security" I mean keeping a government secure - from invasion, economic demise, attack, etc. rather than the more Orwellian "we're here to protect you which is why we must be involved in every aspect of your life."