He should go back to what he does well - inventing interesting and useful machines. His prickliness displayed towards those who disagree (often with good reason) with his worldview has done more to harm his reputation than any of his critics' corrections. If you can't take criticism, you shouldn't be a futurist. He also won't be the first whose hubris will lay him low. Get back to the lab while you still can, Ray...
Everyone who says that people won't use a train instead of an automobile is just guessing based on current short-range, low-speed options available today. The utility measure of taking a trip via an actual high-speed train vs. car or plane is probably going to be much different. I'm already fine with taking a low-speed train from Portland to Seattle rather than driving or flying. I'd be even more happy if having a high-speed train would knock another forty-five minutes off the trip. I'd be willing to go even further and say I'd take trips as far as the Bay Area via train because (a) train travel is a lot more relaxing and (b) I am really tired of airport security theater (Yes, there's now some of that on trains, but not nearly as much).
So Yahoo turned out not to be as big as it could have been. So what? A lot of people made money, regardless. The only ones who got didn't were wanks who didn't sell when the selling was good. Sure, PG's pissed^Wsaddened because it didn't turn into the GOOG, but he sort of had a vested interest in that happening, didn't he? Pull the mote out of your own investor's eye, Paul. Really, it's all about the money and most of the people who mattered did just fine by that measure, didn't they?
The only thing they're doing right is bleeding money from the people at the bottom and funneling it into the fuel tanks of their Gulfstreams.
It's a consequence capitalism. Anyone who can convince someone that they'll be better off with something than without and sell something (themselves, even) will make more money than someone who can only make things. Long term? There is no long term. Make enough money in the short term and who cares.
He'd eaten about half to three quarters of it when I pointed out to him that he was, in fact, enjoying a big pile of veggies.
Why did you chime in then, rather than waiting for the whole thing to go down? Less drama if you would have done that. I'll chalk it up to your inexperience, because I wouldn't like to assume that you believe that the best way to teach your kid is to be a dick.
Man, their economy must just be screwed with all of that government interference! I'm sure glad their economy will be dropping off a cliff any day now!
There are people that are fucking dead right now because of Julian's ego, and more are joining them tomorrow.
Nice assertion. Care to back it up with a few citations, giving names, dates of death, etc. and showing direct linkage? I really don't think you can, because you seem to be the type to scream the latest right-wing/military complex talking points rather than actually doing research. Plus, if you really can show people being harmed, I'm pretty sure that the NYT would publish that, let alone Drudge.
...as I said he thought he knew better than his military experts and supplied insufficient resources
Given the way things are going in Afghanistan, maybe he was right in trying to cut losses as much as possible. Unless you think that the "military experts" have no vested interest in making a conflict as large as possible.
Are the better entries as transparent? ELO's a pretty simple way do do this - add or subtract a few points from the rating based on a win or a loss based on the relative difference of the ratings. Would anyone understand (other than "It's a neural net") the ratings produced by these competitors? Would anything human be able to calculate them?
Also, are the new models' improvements in prediction statistically relevant? Or are they just fitting the noise? Both the training dataset and the test dataset seem rather small to me.
Finally, and most importantly, how stable are the ratings? If I'm drunk and lose to a "patzer", do I go down to his level? Fairness of tournaments having small numbers of games has a lot to do with rating stability (unless we're assuming a population periodically beset by huge random shifts in ability).
All-in-all, there's a lot of problems coming up with a good rating system. Opening the dataset to the world, saying "Have at it!", and looking at a single scorecard based solely on predictability is nowhere near sufficient.
Same here, except for KQAC streaming 24-7 from beautiful Portland, Oregon. And these two aren't the only ones. There are a whole bunch of live streams that one can listen to while connected. In many ways, streaming has brought back classical, jazz, and other musical formats that, a few years ago, were in danger of being lost when public radio was transitioning wholesale to news. HD allowed alternate streams to be played over the air and streaming them to the internet connected them to a whole bunch of listeners who (although remote) also turned into financial supporters of these stations and their streams. It's been a really good thing for these stations and this kind of music.
Shouldn't you ask the opposite? I.e., what was "killing the tax program" doing in bills funding "domestic violence shelters, police and fire departments, and prevention of swine flu outbreaks"?
Stuff like this is why a program like the "Fair Tax" won't ever pass.
No, a program like "Fair" Tax won't pass because it's ultimately regressive with respect to percentage of disposable income retained by low-income participants after payment of this tax and would only be used as a stalking horse for reducing the percentage paid by upper-bracket individuals while still allowing many deductions available to said upper-bracket individuals (unless you can tell me with a straight face that the government will give up all tax-related financial engineering via the tax code). People who really believe that the "Fair" Tax would really be fair are the same folks who could believe that a Libertarian government is more realistic than a Communist one, i.e., simplistic minds with simplistic solutions which lead to horrific consequences. But go for it. Destroying our government and devolving into anarchy should be on everyone's short list of things to do (and, yes, I'm being sarcastic about this last part - note added for the simplistic minded).
I've heard that there are these places called community colleges that supposedly have these "class" things. If you don't want that, you could probably read a book or a website or something.
Can you make one concrete example to back up what you said? If I make a pair of shoes by paying to learn how to do it, then buying the materials and then putting in my time and labor to make them, and then sell them, how are you entitled to a share of that?
Where did the roads over which your materials came to you come from? How were the purchasing contracts enforced? How was robbery prevented so you kept the money to purchase your materials? Any man receives great value by living as part of a civilized society. If one does not recognize that, he is truly blind.
If you mean something nebulous like I benefit from the combined knowledge of the human race then those people who made contributions that you are basing yours on already got paid for theirs.
No, he was talking about concrete, tangible benefits that you seem to blindly ignore and that you wish to "free ride" on. Nice piece of theft from the rest of us...
Slashdot Mirror
He should go back to what he does well - inventing interesting and useful machines. His prickliness displayed towards those who disagree (often with good reason) with his worldview has done more to harm his reputation than any of his critics' corrections. If you can't take criticism, you shouldn't be a futurist. He also won't be the first whose hubris will lay him low. Get back to the lab while you still can, Ray...
... if you don't build it, they won't come.
Everyone who says that people won't use a train instead of an automobile is just guessing based on current short-range, low-speed options available today. The utility measure of taking a trip via an actual high-speed train vs. car or plane is probably going to be much different. I'm already fine with taking a low-speed train from Portland to Seattle rather than driving or flying. I'd be even more happy if having a high-speed train would knock another forty-five minutes off the trip. I'd be willing to go even further and say I'd take trips as far as the Bay Area via train because (a) train travel is a lot more relaxing and (b) I am really tired of airport security theater (Yes, there's now some of that on trains, but not nearly as much).
... how many staplers does the soul cost?
Current market value is 7.85 generic staplers, but only 1 model 747 red Swingline - but buy fast, the market is heating up...
So Yahoo turned out not to be as big as it could have been. So what? A lot of people made money, regardless. The only ones who got didn't were wanks who didn't sell when the selling was good. Sure, PG's pissed^Wsaddened because it didn't turn into the GOOG, but he sort of had a vested interest in that happening, didn't he? Pull the mote out of your own investor's eye, Paul. Really, it's all about the money and most of the people who mattered did just fine by that measure, didn't they?
The only thing they're doing right is bleeding money from the people at the bottom and funneling it into the fuel tanks of their Gulfstreams.
It's a consequence capitalism. Anyone who can convince someone that they'll be better off with something than without and sell something (themselves, even) will make more money than someone who can only make things. Long term? There is no long term. Make enough money in the short term and who cares.
He'd eaten about half to three quarters of it when I pointed out to him that he was, in fact, enjoying a big pile of veggies.
Why did you chime in then, rather than waiting for the whole thing to go down? Less drama if you would have done that. I'll chalk it up to your inexperience, because I wouldn't like to assume that you believe that the best way to teach your kid is to be a dick.
Would you find it as hilarious if Maxine Waters died and someone posted "GOOD RIDDANCE?"
I'm a Libertarian, you insensitive clod! They can both die!
Yes. Because going without a Federal government would work SOOOO well.
If Larry Ellison backs Hurd then he must be his kind of scum - fearless and inventive. Takes one to know one.
Man, their economy must just be screwed with all of that government interference! I'm sure glad their economy will be dropping off a cliff any day now!
... don't talk about committing the crime.
The leak of these documents has/will lead to the deaths of many people on our (NATO) side who provided information about the Taliban.
Citation needed.
Please provide names, dates of death, and provide evidence to link the killing to the leak. Otherwise, you're just trying to blow smoke up our ass.
There are people that are fucking dead right now because of Julian's ego, and more are joining them tomorrow.
Nice assertion. Care to back it up with a few citations, giving names, dates of death, etc. and showing direct linkage? I really don't think you can, because you seem to be the type to scream the latest right-wing/military complex talking points rather than actually doing research. Plus, if you really can show people being harmed, I'm pretty sure that the NYT would publish that, let alone Drudge.
...as I said he thought he knew better than his military experts and supplied insufficient resources
Given the way things are going in Afghanistan, maybe he was right in trying to cut losses as much as possible. Unless you think that the "military experts" have no vested interest in making a conflict as large as possible.
Yes.
Are the better entries as transparent? ELO's a pretty simple way do do this - add or subtract a few points from the rating based on a win or a loss based on the relative difference of the ratings. Would anyone understand (other than "It's a neural net") the ratings produced by these competitors? Would anything human be able to calculate them?
Also, are the new models' improvements in prediction statistically relevant? Or are they just fitting the noise? Both the training dataset and the test dataset seem rather small to me.
Finally, and most importantly, how stable are the ratings? If I'm drunk and lose to a "patzer", do I go down to his level? Fairness of tournaments having small numbers of games has a lot to do with rating stability (unless we're assuming a population periodically beset by huge random shifts in ability).
All-in-all, there's a lot of problems coming up with a good rating system. Opening the dataset to the world, saying "Have at it!", and looking at a single scorecard based solely on predictability is nowhere near sufficient.
I sure hope the dog didn't get sick.
... At least since 2003.
Same here, except for KQAC streaming 24-7 from beautiful Portland, Oregon. And these two aren't the only ones. There are a whole bunch of live streams that one can listen to while connected. In many ways, streaming has brought back classical, jazz, and other musical formats that, a few years ago, were in danger of being lost when public radio was transitioning wholesale to news. HD allowed alternate streams to be played over the air and streaming them to the internet connected them to a whole bunch of listeners who (although remote) also turned into financial supporters of these stations and their streams. It's been a really good thing for these stations and this kind of music.
Shouldn't you ask the opposite? I.e., what was "killing the tax program" doing in bills funding "domestic violence shelters, police and fire departments, and prevention of swine flu outbreaks"?
Stuff like this is why a program like the "Fair Tax" won't ever pass.
No, a program like "Fair" Tax won't pass because it's ultimately regressive with respect to percentage of disposable income retained by low-income participants after payment of this tax and would only be used as a stalking horse for reducing the percentage paid by upper-bracket individuals while still allowing many deductions available to said upper-bracket individuals (unless you can tell me with a straight face that the government will give up all tax-related financial engineering via the tax code). People who really believe that the "Fair" Tax would really be fair are the same folks who could believe that a Libertarian government is more realistic than a Communist one, i.e., simplistic minds with simplistic solutions which lead to horrific consequences. But go for it. Destroying our government and devolving into anarchy should be on everyone's short list of things to do (and, yes, I'm being sarcastic about this last part - note added for the simplistic minded).
Good God, if you really can't figure out where to start, you really are too old.
he recommended we listen to "Lazy" by Deep Purple when studying mathematical successions
Damn. You got mislead. Everyone knows "Lazy" is for integration. "Smoke on the Water" is for mathematical progressions.
I've heard that there are these places called community colleges that supposedly have these "class" things. If you don't want that, you could probably read a book or a website or something.
Worst. Ask Slashdot. Ever.
Can you make one concrete example to back up what you said? If I make a pair of shoes by paying to learn how to do it, then buying the materials and then putting in my time and labor to make them, and then sell them, how are you entitled to a share of that?
Where did the roads over which your materials came to you come from? How were the purchasing contracts enforced? How was robbery prevented so you kept the money to purchase your materials? Any man receives great value by living as part of a civilized society. If one does not recognize that, he is truly blind.
If you mean something nebulous like I benefit from the combined knowledge of the human race then those people who made contributions that you are basing yours on already got paid for theirs.
No, he was talking about concrete, tangible benefits that you seem to blindly ignore and that you wish to "free ride" on. Nice piece of theft from the rest of us...