Stored your image data where it will be held securely and privately to prevent others from using it to train face recognition software [*]
[*] Fine print. Facebook, its parent company, subsidiaries, or business partners may from time to time share such information for quality purposes or for preparation of special offers for your delight. In addition FB et. al. will comply with any legitimate court orders of the country of origin, destination, storage, or transferal including any secret courts as needed to combat terrorism. In addition FB will comply with any treaty obligations concerning such information including edicts of unelected arbitration councils, courts, or enabling legislation. So don't worry, your information is safe from prying eyes.
That is only part of the story. More instrumentation may not help if you are measuring the wrong things. Secondly you are dealing with complex systems modeled by non-linear equations with no closed form solutions. Ever. There may be a plethora of potential solutions but they may represent local solutions as opposed to global solutions. Past a certain point Math can't help you and if Math can't help you neither will a computer model.
Weather models have gotten better at long range global trends and very short range predictions, about 48 to 72 hours. But 100% accuracy is impossible. But perhaps earthquake models might make it to the 2 or 3 day warning point. But I am skeptical.
Since both the intelligence agencies and the DoD have huge black budgets who know what other companies they are investing in. How is it that companies with no profits keep getting funded?
It was intentional. Whether or not government should be involved depends on the situation. Space exploration with its huge risks and massive expensive is a natural for government to assist in its development.
Big if there. In true libertarian fashion the company would have to have the numbers in a spread sheet, attract investors, get loans, float bonds or some combination thereof while saying, "hey are rockets explode but we'll be successful real soon now!"
But only the Gov't is willing and able to take a risk that big. So in this case government intrusion in the market place was the only option. The private sector cannot or will not take such huge risks.
Wrong. This has global implications including how you work. Would you or have worked on tech which could enable torture? Where does that put you morally and ethically? And are you comfortable with it?
Not necessarily. It depends on the CIA's enabling legislation. There may be some wiggle room such as a clause stating "using the means to gather information at the Directors discretion to gather intelligence". Time and time again it has been shown torture is ineffective. This allows the director to say "no" under US law.
He wrote a lot on the use of propaganda. And by the way, he was as suspicious of corporations and capitalists, as he was of politicians of all stripes (Fascists and "Communists" alike).
Slashdot Mirror
She also made Lucent what it is today. Let's never forget Lucent.
And they ca't quit to find better paying jobs. They are de facto indentured servants..
But that would mean they would have fix their crappy software. "Scheduling? No one told anything about scheduling...."
Mercedes at least is removing the robots:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
At least for small batchs humans with their flexibility are are better than robots.
Stored your image data where it will be held securely and privately to prevent others from using it to train face recognition software [*]
[*] Fine print. Facebook, its parent company, subsidiaries, or business partners may from time to time share such information for quality purposes or for preparation of special offers for your delight. In addition FB et. al. will comply with any legitimate court orders of the country of origin, destination, storage, or transferal including any secret courts as needed to combat terrorism. In addition FB will comply with any treaty obligations concerning such information including edicts of unelected arbitration councils, courts, or enabling legislation. So don't worry, your information is safe from prying eyes.
You obviously don't know what a "fluff piece" is or a "fluffer".
which is closer to the actual TOC. It will be remembered as what destroyed the American Empire.
So what? They violated common sense. Because safety was too expensive.
Of what happens when you leave safety up to the private sector.
When I use money for illegal purposes I use money orders!
That's corporate innovation for you...
That is only part of the story. More instrumentation may not help if you are measuring the wrong things. Secondly you are dealing with complex systems modeled by non-linear equations with no closed form solutions. Ever. There may be a plethora of potential solutions but they may represent local solutions as opposed to global solutions. Past a certain point Math can't help you and if Math can't help you neither will a computer model.
Weather models have gotten better at long range global trends and very short range predictions, about 48 to 72 hours. But 100% accuracy is impossible. But perhaps earthquake models might make it to the 2 or 3 day warning point. But I am skeptical.
Since both the intelligence agencies and the DoD have huge black budgets who know what other companies they are investing in. How is it that companies with no profits keep getting funded?
cheaper to make + cheaper to operate.
you missed the point
It was intentional. Whether or not government should be involved depends on the situation. Space exploration with its huge risks and massive expensive is a natural for government to assist in its development.
a well is a well.
Big if there. In true libertarian fashion the company would have to have the numbers in a spread sheet, attract investors, get loans, float bonds or some combination thereof while saying, "hey are rockets explode but we'll be successful real soon now!"
But only the Gov't is willing and able to take a risk that big. So in this case government intrusion in the market place was the only option. The private sector cannot or will not take such huge risks.
In this case the right way to do it was to hire lobbyists so you can suck off of the government teat.
Wrong. This has global implications including how you work. Would you or have worked on tech which could enable torture? Where does that put you morally and ethically? And are you comfortable with it?
Not necessarily. It depends on the CIA's enabling legislation. There may be some wiggle room such as a clause stating "using the means to gather information at the Directors discretion to gather intelligence". Time and time again it has been shown torture is ineffective. This allows the director to say "no" under US law.
And LSD. Where do I sign up?
"Developers who can't ship their code, usually can't write good code either, and don't understand the bigger picture of systems they're creating"
That's most of the developers I've seen. Good QA can save them from themselves.
New Zealand might be a better idea... or some other place in a different hemisphere
He wrote a lot on the use of propaganda. And by the way, he was as suspicious of corporations and capitalists, as he was of politicians of all stripes (Fascists and "Communists" alike).