No, after user_a.age have been assigned 18, the assignment will return 18, which is true. The problem in this case is that the algorithm is overzealous, and will also flag 18- user_a males as predators.
I like that. An overzealous algorithm. Our OP could easily swing a government contract with that ringing endorsement.
I need ten young, healthy people to sign up with me for a health care pool. Of course, I will statistically receive the lion's share of the proceeds, but content yourselves with the fact that You Care. I'll even send you a certificate suitable for framing that shamelessly declares your uber-caringness.
At first I thought, "Wow! Somebody actually considered the ethics of this program," but then I read, "Organ donations from prisoners were not ideal because rates of fungal and bacterial infection in prisoner organs were quite high, and affected the long-term survival rates of those who undergo the transplants." So, confronted with the need to improve the incubation environment for their organ supply and consequently the living conditions of their wards, they choose instead to ditch the program. And just like that my cynicism is once again vindicated. Wretched!
We certainly aren't teaching responsibility. That requires trust. I've reared several kids throughout the years. Some I micromanaged. Later, I learned to teach them morals and ethics and allowed them to develop their own behaviors while still maintaining a safety net where required. The latter group seem much more well-adjusted and have avoided a lot of the trouble the first set still manages to find. In my opinion, the government is not doing these kids, and itself by extension, any good.
Indeed. The headline might lead one to believe that one camera could identify, hash, lookup, and store information on 36 million distinct faces per second - like looking at the world's biggest mob and processing everybody present. Still, this technology will undoubtedly be on Big Brother's Christmas list. Why, just imagine the civil liberty carnage a Beowulf cluster of these things could cause.
Slashdot Mirror
If I were to say yes, would you stop asking?
No, after user_a.age have been assigned 18, the assignment will return 18, which is true. The problem in this case is that the algorithm is overzealous, and will also flag 18- user_a males as predators.
I like that. An overzealous algorithm. Our OP could easily swing a government contract with that ringing endorsement.
Heh, I don't think he qualifies as a predator, or at least not the kind we're trying to identify.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Indeed I am! A bit of fun in an off-topic branch.
I think there are two bugs. You found one.
a: F40 b: M12
This would not flag as predator.
(though that might be intentional)
Heh, I don't think he qualifies as a predator, or at least not the kind we're trying to identify.
detect_predator = (user_a.sex == "M" or user_b.sex == "M") and ((user_a.age=18) or (user_b.age>=18))
Boom! I win! Give me reward moneys.
You have a bug in your user_a detection that allows 19+ males to slip through.
I was also thinking you should ask for pictures from those young people before letting them in your pool.
Heh! No, that's just creepy. Stacks of Hamilton portraits are more than adequate. The TOS will disqualify any fraudulent claims should they arise.
I need ten young, healthy people to sign up with me for a health care pool. Of course, I will statistically receive the lion's share of the proceeds, but content yourselves with the fact that You Care. I'll even send you a certificate suitable for framing that shamelessly declares your uber-caringness.
That page says 9.5 mpg in the air.
That's 9.5 gph rather than mpg. Still, at 12 mpg, I'm doing better than my SUV in an airplane that doubles as a car. What's not to like?
MPG?
38 mpg on the road, 21 mpg in the air (calculated). I pulled stats from the chart here: googleusercontent.com
But, according to the newer page here: pal-v.com, we have 28 mpg on the ground and about 12 mpg in the air (calculated).
MPG?
38 mpg on the road, 21 mpg in the air (calculated). I pulled stats from the chart here: googleusercontent.com
I don't take notes during meetings. If I can't remember your content immediately afterwards, it doesn't even rate a yellow sticky.
It's still very, very scary: rttnews.com .
The potential in future of people being able to generate their own fuel if they so desire could really be a game changer IMO.
It will definitely spark a revenuer's revival.
I used wireshark to fix a bug today. Apparently I would be a criminal in the UK, with a minimum sentence of 2 years.
Nothing so elaborate is required. I've perpetrated some beautiful felonies with netcat one-liners.
4.98951607 kilograms robot can jump 9.14400 meters into the air.
I have two words for you: significant figures. Everything else is just noise...metric noise.
Who gives a shit? These people were dead anyway. It doesn't matter what happens to their body afterwards
“How we treat our dead is part of what makes us different than those did the slaughtering.” - Shepherd Book
At first I thought, "Wow! Somebody actually considered the ethics of this program," but then I read, "Organ donations from prisoners were not ideal because rates of fungal and bacterial infection in prisoner organs were quite high, and affected the long-term survival rates of those who undergo the transplants." So, confronted with the need to improve the incubation environment for their organ supply and consequently the living conditions of their wards, they choose instead to ditch the program. And just like that my cynicism is once again vindicated. Wretched!
We certainly aren't teaching responsibility. That requires trust. I've reared several kids throughout the years. Some I micromanaged. Later, I learned to teach them morals and ethics and allowed them to develop their own behaviors while still maintaining a safety net where required. The latter group seem much more well-adjusted and have avoided a lot of the trouble the first set still manages to find. In my opinion, the government is not doing these kids, and itself by extension, any good.
Indeed. The headline might lead one to believe that one camera could identify, hash, lookup, and store information on 36 million distinct faces per second - like looking at the world's biggest mob and processing everybody present. Still, this technology will undoubtedly be on Big Brother's Christmas list. Why, just imagine the civil liberty carnage a Beowulf cluster of these things could cause.
I read your first two links and they had exactly zero to do with paying google for search relevance.
Directly? No, that would never stand.
softpedia.com
arstechnica.com
redsauce.com
Silly consumer, you have to pay Google for relevance.
All jokes aside though, let's shame a few of the rich guys. I'll open with Strauss-Kahn, Michael Jackson, and Ted Kennedy.
Oh wait, the rich don't go to jail, they just make settlements.
You should contact Madoff and Blagojevich with your astounding insight.
A new species you say? How about the master race. The Chinese have been telling us this for thousands of years.