Do you have an example experiment that you can put up there that will have meaningful results? How much time do you need to invest to verify that your payload is actually going to do the experiment that you think it's going to do?
Useful things that you put on rockets typically are also things that you don't want to explode. The entire reason to put a "payload simulator" (in this case a car) in the first launch of a new rocket is to not spend huge amounts of money on research and development building something useful, and then have it blow up when the rocket doesn't work.
You should show whichever one you use. If you get marked down for correct reasoning written down, then you should complain about the marking. That's the point - don't complain about having to show your work - having to show your work is good. Complain about teachers who are too incompetent to see correct, and valid work that doesn't match their expected sequence to solve the problem.
If you can prove that they're valid, then write them down, and everything's good! That's the point - if you can formally verify them, then you can also write them down, so write them down, so that we can check your formal verifications.
The why is simple - the flow for paying with PayPal is terrible. It involves logging in multiple times to multiple different services, being bounced off eBays web page, to pay pal's web page, all kinds of crazy shit going on. This lets ebay just have a sane payments form like every other eCommerce site ever.
The problem is that so many of those "intuitive" tricks that we build up in our heads are not actually true. We have no concrete proof that they're valid steps in the simplification of the problem. By demanding that you right down the steps you take, the teacher can point out when you take a step that doesn't actually hold up.
No, more likely he lied. If you go read the article, and watch the video, you'll see that this guy has a HOST of dodgy "records", that have either been proven to be impossible, or are strongly suspected of being impossible. He's for example, "scored" 6000 in a game that counts its score in an 8 bit register.
There have been other cases where he claimed a transcription error, or a coffee stain causing someone to misread an error... In those cases, even the corrected version turned out to be impossible as well!
Memory errors are highly unlikely - since generally these things rely on the hardware timer unit (which is synced to the system clock), without which nothing else works. As others have stated, rogers had a huge list of dodgy "records" that have either been proven to be impossible, or are strongly suspected of being impossible. He's even got records like scoring 6000 on a game that counts its score in an 8 bit register.
There's basically no evidence that any of his records were ever legit.
What makes you think you can take money out of the machine without the software install?
Cracking safes, quickly and quietly with no one noticing is really hard. Sticking a USB stick with some malware on it into a port and leaving, without anyone noticing is pretty trivially easy.
The benefit to society here is that we can support more people with less human work. All those people who used to drive UPS vans can now either go and do more important jobs, or can go and relax on a beach. The only difficulty is that we ALSO need to make progress on how to structure an economy where not everyone needs to work all the damn time in order to survive, and how we make sure that all the benefits of that society get spread out to the whole society, rather than constrained to a few extremely wealthy individuals.
Also, junking cars in the UK when they're young is nothing to do with weird laws, it's to do with being on an island surrounded by salt water. A car that makes it to 150,000 miles in the UK is close to a miracle, because everything will have turned to rust by then.
Welcome to having a tiny sample size, and hence huge error bars. This doesn't show that there's an issue with using correlations as predictors, it shows that there's an issue with trying to find correlations in tiny sample sizes.
Yes, but they *also* incorporate other statistical analyses into determining your premium. Common ones that predict higher claim rates include:
Are you male (illegal in the UK now, but was a good predictor)
Are you under 25
Do you live in certain areas
Do you drive a modified car
Do you drive a cheap car with a powerful engine...
Apparently the issue is mostly that modern cars have really fancy bumpers. A bumper that includes a bunch of camera equipment, and range sensors, and all kinds of other fancy gadgetry costs a lot. That means that fender benders cost a lot to repair now, when they used to be trivially cheap. It also means that fender benders tend to get reported to the insurer now, when they used to just be ignored.
Well, there's nothing wrong with that, other than it appears that that attitude correlates strongly with higher car accident rates. It's worthy of higher rates exactly because there's a correlation that lets the insurance company predict that you'll cost them more if you exhibit that behavioral pattern.
They don't need to establish what the causation is, only that there is a reliable correlation. With a reliable correlation, they can predict more accurately who will get in an accident, and that's all that matters.
So, you want to set prices purely based on that driver's past performance, fair enough. That means you need to find all the premiums you're currently charging people who've had no accidents, average them, and charge that to all those people. Great.
However, for a fair proportion of those drivers who were in low risk categories according to statistical analysis, you've just put their premium up significantly. Those drivers will all go to another insurer who is still doing statistical analysis of risk. Now you're left with the drivers for whom you cut their premium, because they were higher risk.
Now you're stuck selling cheap insurance to high risk individuals, and will pay out more than you accept in premiums...
And... you're bust. You should probably not go into managing an insurance company.
You apparently need to go and sit in a Volvo. They are most definitely luxury cars, at least on a par with Audi and BMW, though not on a par with Porsche and Bentley.
Hey, centuries ago called. News papers, news broadcasts, and news websites contain, and have contained for decades editorial content. This is nothing new, or nefarious. The headline calls out that this is a commentary piece, not a news piece.
It also doesn't work well in terms of interaction models. No one in practice is going to go and scan the barcode on the wall to verify that their connection is secure. It's just not convenient enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have an example experiment that you can put up there that will have meaningful results? How much time do you need to invest to verify that your payload is actually going to do the experiment that you think it's going to do?
Useful things that you put on rockets typically are also things that you don't want to explode. The entire reason to put a "payload simulator" (in this case a car) in the first launch of a new rocket is to not spend huge amounts of money on research and development building something useful, and then have it blow up when the rocket doesn't work.
You should show whichever one you use. If you get marked down for correct reasoning written down, then you should complain about the marking. That's the point - don't complain about having to show your work - having to show your work is good. Complain about teachers who are too incompetent to see correct, and valid work that doesn't match their expected sequence to solve the problem.
If you can prove that they're valid, then write them down, and everything's good! That's the point - if you can formally verify them, then you can also write them down, so write them down, so that we can check your formal verifications.
The why is simple - the flow for paying with PayPal is terrible. It involves logging in multiple times to multiple different services, being bounced off eBays web page, to pay pal's web page, all kinds of crazy shit going on. This lets ebay just have a sane payments form like every other eCommerce site ever.
The problem is that so many of those "intuitive" tricks that we build up in our heads are not actually true. We have no concrete proof that they're valid steps in the simplification of the problem. By demanding that you right down the steps you take, the teacher can point out when you take a step that doesn't actually hold up.
No, more likely he lied. If you go read the article, and watch the video, you'll see that this guy has a HOST of dodgy "records", that have either been proven to be impossible, or are strongly suspected of being impossible. He's for example, "scored" 6000 in a game that counts its score in an 8 bit register.
There have been other cases where he claimed a transcription error, or a coffee stain causing someone to misread an error... In those cases, even the corrected version turned out to be impossible as well!
The Atari 2600 had no floating point unit.
Memory errors are highly unlikely - since generally these things rely on the hardware timer unit (which is synced to the system clock), without which nothing else works. As others have stated, rogers had a huge list of dodgy "records" that have either been proven to be impossible, or are strongly suspected of being impossible. He's even got records like scoring 6000 on a game that counts its score in an 8 bit register.
There's basically no evidence that any of his records were ever legit.
What makes you think you can take money out of the machine without the software install?
Cracking safes, quickly and quietly with no one noticing is really hard. Sticking a USB stick with some malware on it into a port and leaving, without anyone noticing is pretty trivially easy.
The benefit to society here is that we can support more people with less human work. All those people who used to drive UPS vans can now either go and do more important jobs, or can go and relax on a beach. The only difficulty is that we ALSO need to make progress on how to structure an economy where not everyone needs to work all the damn time in order to survive, and how we make sure that all the benefits of that society get spread out to the whole society, rather than constrained to a few extremely wealthy individuals.
And that climate is cause by... oh right... the massive amount of water all around.
You know how that water travels two hundred miles inland and makes all cars rust... IN FUCKING CLOUDS!
Also, junking cars in the UK when they're young is nothing to do with weird laws, it's to do with being on an island surrounded by salt water. A car that makes it to 150,000 miles in the UK is close to a miracle, because everything will have turned to rust by then.
It's not simple backup cameras here, it's cameras for lane keep assist, or adaptive cruise control, or ...
Welcome to having a tiny sample size, and hence huge error bars. This doesn't show that there's an issue with using correlations as predictors, it shows that there's an issue with trying to find correlations in tiny sample sizes.
No one asserted that there's a causation here. They only asserted that there's a reliable correlation, which can be used as a predictor.
Yes, but they *also* incorporate other statistical analyses into determining your premium. Common ones that predict higher claim rates include:
Are you male (illegal in the UK now, but was a good predictor) ...
Are you under 25
Do you live in certain areas
Do you drive a modified car
Do you drive a cheap car with a powerful engine
Apparently the issue is mostly that modern cars have really fancy bumpers. A bumper that includes a bunch of camera equipment, and range sensors, and all kinds of other fancy gadgetry costs a lot. That means that fender benders cost a lot to repair now, when they used to be trivially cheap. It also means that fender benders tend to get reported to the insurer now, when they used to just be ignored.
Well, there's nothing wrong with that, other than it appears that that attitude correlates strongly with higher car accident rates. It's worthy of higher rates exactly because there's a correlation that lets the insurance company predict that you'll cost them more if you exhibit that behavioral pattern.
They don't need to establish what the causation is, only that there is a reliable correlation. With a reliable correlation, they can predict more accurately who will get in an accident, and that's all that matters.
So, you want to set prices purely based on that driver's past performance, fair enough. That means you need to find all the premiums you're currently charging people who've had no accidents, average them, and charge that to all those people. Great.
However, for a fair proportion of those drivers who were in low risk categories according to statistical analysis, you've just put their premium up significantly. Those drivers will all go to another insurer who is still doing statistical analysis of risk. Now you're left with the drivers for whom you cut their premium, because they were higher risk.
Now you're stuck selling cheap insurance to high risk individuals, and will pay out more than you accept in premiums...
And... you're bust. You should probably not go into managing an insurance company.
Ethylene glycol poisoning is *still* extremely common in animals.
You apparently need to go and sit in a Volvo. They are most definitely luxury cars, at least on a par with Audi and BMW, though not on a par with Porsche and Bentley.
Hey, centuries ago called. News papers, news broadcasts, and news websites contain, and have contained for decades editorial content. This is nothing new, or nefarious. The headline calls out that this is a commentary piece, not a news piece.
It also doesn't work well in terms of interaction models. No one in practice is going to go and scan the barcode on the wall to verify that their connection is secure. It's just not convenient enough.
Yes - but both AMD and ARM are affected by Spectre, which there is NO KNOWN FIX for.