My algorithm does better than 66% and I'm open sourcing it right here... (Predicts whether site will be hacked between now and the destruction of earth)
public boolean willSiteBeHacked(Vector whateverYouFeelLike) {
return true; }
Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, has been working on much more functional prosthetics. He named his bionic arm "Luke", an obvious reference we can all appreciate. Demos of it look pretty amazing.
Here's the official page for it: http://www.dekaresearch.com/deka_arm.shtml
Also google "Kamen Luke Arm" and you find lots of pix, vids and articles about it.
There really is no benefit to becoming adversarial or doing anything to undermine the future success of the project. And there are many possible down sides, including your rep within that company and your broader rep.
Continue to provide them the best value you can. It sounds like right now that value might be to advise them on the level of complexity of their codebase and the level of talent and experience needed to maintain and continue development on it. Even if that doesn't change their minds, you are on record with your attempts to help them steer a better course. And then, whatever their decision, do the best you can to transition knowledge and prepare the new guy for success.
If you leave with them knowing that you did everything you could to help them make good decisions, and you did everything you could to help them be successful given the decisions that they made, they'll be much more likely to call you for the next project. Or maybe the CTO will call you when he finds a challenging project at his next company. If you help people out, even when there is no angle for you, and create a history of doing this, you'll find that people want to work with you and there are more opportunities coming your way.
If you burn these guys, and do it again somewhere else, and create a history of that, you'll eventually find that people don't want to work with you.
Building a good rep and a network of people who recognize your value and enjoy working with you is a long-term investment worth making.
That's really an excellent point that I had not considered. It would certainly be possible to build a curriculum that is completely in compliance with these laws, but that uses the presentation of Intelligent Design as a counterexample to show what science is *not*. You could teach the scientific method and the work that led up to our current understanding of evolution, including the abundant evidence supporting it and the hypotheses that have been shown to be true. Then teach a unit on logical fallacies, manipulation, rhetorical trickery, superstition and cult psychology. Then use what you have learned to examine the scientific merit of Intelligent Design. Fuck, I just convinced myself that we *should* be teaching ID!! And teaching it well, so people understand exactly what it is, what the claims are, what evidence exists (or doesn't) to support those claims, how the message is carefully crafted for specific effect, and how the whole thing relates and compares to actual scientific work. Once we have this curriculum ready, any time some idiotic state passes a law like this schools in that jurisdiction would be able to turn to it to maintain their standards.
Make it so!
...thousands of times faster than current state-of-the-art copper and optical networks...
Nope. Electrons and photons still moving at the speed of light, which is relatively constant. (c what I did there?!?)
Ok, mostly I'm just being a smart ass. This may improve throughput and/or latency. But our chips are running into constraints due to the fact that the electrons can only go so far in on clock cycle. The stuff is cool, but it's not going to fix those problems.
Maybe. But most of the time they don't prosecute things like this, even though they are technically in violation. This is high profile enough that it might get a different response. My bet, though, is that they let him slip into retirement as quietly as possible.
Yes, some people are trying to do that. That's the point. The way to fight it is to get some solid legal precedents established that clearly state that citizens have the right to record in public, including police doing their duty. Any decision that establishes that right or builds towards it helps. And this one might be a building block that helps the case.
I hope someone will soon put to the legal test the assertion that what this allows police to do without a warrant can be done by any citizen, including by any citizen towards the police. This may help to support the rights of citizens to record police officers while they are on duty. Hey, if any property that doesn't have a building on it is fair game for surveillance, by anyone, it opens up opportunity for all of the citizenry. Not saying I like this, but maybe there is a positive side to it.
Their thought: "hey, well catch the bad guys who are trying to get around security!"
Reality: they catch the nerds who know how to hack barcodes and want to save 10 minutes of waiting in a security line.
But this is giving them too much credit. They are not thinking that far ahead. They are still stuck on shoe bombs (22 Dec 2001).
Yes. That's what jumped out at me too. Revealing medical mistakes is a reason to do *more* autopsies. And any doctors or hospitals who are "uncomfortable" with that need to get out of the business. If you are not interested in having some QC to improve your processes, I don't want you involved in my medical care.
Why are you explaining and asking permission to use a tool? Download git, install it, use it, done. Standard practice, free, so what's the issue? Just do it. The management doesn't want to see how the sausage is made.
Also, there is a "manage your management" issue here. When the bosses ask if you need anything, you need to provide answers that they understand and can accomplish. Asking for something they don't understand and don't know how to get for you leads to them feeling stupid and ineffective. Line up your own tools without bothering them. When they ask what you need be ready with something that they can easily accomplish, like stocking the fridge with Mt. Dew.
Well if the ER just gives the patient more homeopathic treatment it will save those 10s of thousands of pounds. Mission accomplished.
BTW, reading your.sig, I should have sprinkled my post liberally with ~s.
To some extent I am just being a smart-ass agitator. But the serious point within the snarking is that large health care institutions like NHS or Medicare don't care if you are healthy. They just want you to live and die while pulling as few dollars as possible from the pool, and without making a fuss that will cause them trouble. No one judges the administrators of these programs by how healthy the people in their program are.
There is zero scientific evidence homeopathy works. Absolutely none.
Wrong. Your problem is in your definition of "works". Works mean achieves some goal you were trying to reach, and perhaps the goal you are thinking of is not the one NHS is trying to reach. Their job is not to cure everyone of everything. Their job is to *control expenses* while *minimizing complaints*. And it is very likely that providing homeopathy will help achieve those goals. Therefore it "works". Remember, even the homeopathy supporters admit that often treatments do not contain even a single molecule of the diluted substance. (cite ) I cannot think of a more cost effective treatment than water, maybe with a bit of food coloring. Even a small reduction in whining would make it cost effective. From an institutional health perspective it's pure genius!!
Our vocal chords make clicks. In very low tones I can hear the individual clicks. I can see it being possible to for a person to gain the control over their voice to be able to make a single click, then do that at whatever interval they want. That doesn't really seem like a "tone" to me, but this must be what they are doing here.
Feynman reveled in the multitude of phenomena that we do not yet understand, and he had a way of sharing that fascination and excitement with the student/listener/reader. Many of his lectures, to me at least, seem to primarily be attempts to describe the landscape of science, which things are known and where there is unexplored territory, or at least unanswered questions. And the picture he paints indicates that what we understand is a small percentage of the world/universe around us. There are so many basic things that we can observe, describe, and even predict, but we don't actually understand how they work. Like gravity.
Smart people are a threat to those who hold power. Especially the subset of smart people who are politically engaged and willing to put themselves at risk to protest and demand change. And among them, the subset who are world famous and therefore have easy access to the press, well, they are just beyond dangerous.
There is a long history of new dictatorial regimes wiping out, killing, or scaring away all of the educated class, thus making the general populace less likely to organize, garner international attention, or outsmart anyone in the regime. This fits the pattern.
Careful selection of the crew for the first manned mission to the sun could dramatically improve the quality of political discourse here on earth. (Think "B Ark")
Well, I don't know if any of those really have "value", except possibly the image sorting. But in all cases I can probably build algorithms that do it faster, cheaper, and possibly better than the average person getting paid a dollar an hour to do it.
First of all, as someone who's work in parallel computing for a while, I think it's actually quite hard to define tasks that actually have value that can be broken down into such small and easy sub-tasks. And within the set of problems where you can do that, there is a pretty large overlap between what a completely untrained person can do and what a perl script can do. So the whole idea of an army of anonymous random humans adding microvalue that adds up to big value is problematic for me. Maybe there is theoretical value there, but so many things could go wrong.
Secondly, if you can clearly define a task like that, and what it is worth to you, why restrict your solution to humans? Provide an API and let me try to solve it algorithmically. If all you care about is getting the task done, what does it matter whether I get it done with a dozen Indian subcontractors, a thousand trained monkeys, or a clever little genetic algorithm?
Slashdot Mirror
My algorithm does better than 66% and I'm open sourcing it right here...
(Predicts whether site will be hacked between now and the destruction of earth)
public boolean willSiteBeHacked(Vector whateverYouFeelLike) {
return true;
}
You can't disprove my claim.
Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, has been working on much more functional prosthetics. He named his bionic arm "Luke", an obvious reference we can all appreciate. Demos of it look pretty amazing. Here's the official page for it: http://www.dekaresearch.com/deka_arm.shtml Also google "Kamen Luke Arm" and you find lots of pix, vids and articles about it.
+1. Way to bring it back around.
Parent post is well stated.
There really is no benefit to becoming adversarial or doing anything to undermine the future success of the project. And there are many possible down sides, including your rep within that company and your broader rep.
Continue to provide them the best value you can. It sounds like right now that value might be to advise them on the level of complexity of their codebase and the level of talent and experience needed to maintain and continue development on it. Even if that doesn't change their minds, you are on record with your attempts to help them steer a better course. And then, whatever their decision, do the best you can to transition knowledge and prepare the new guy for success.
If you leave with them knowing that you did everything you could to help them make good decisions, and you did everything you could to help them be successful given the decisions that they made, they'll be much more likely to call you for the next project. Or maybe the CTO will call you when he finds a challenging project at his next company. If you help people out, even when there is no angle for you, and create a history of doing this, you'll find that people want to work with you and there are more opportunities coming your way.
If you burn these guys, and do it again somewhere else, and create a history of that, you'll eventually find that people don't want to work with you.
Building a good rep and a network of people who recognize your value and enjoy working with you is a long-term investment worth making.
That's really an excellent point that I had not considered. It would certainly be possible to build a curriculum that is completely in compliance with these laws, but that uses the presentation of Intelligent Design as a counterexample to show what science is *not*. You could teach the scientific method and the work that led up to our current understanding of evolution, including the abundant evidence supporting it and the hypotheses that have been shown to be true. Then teach a unit on logical fallacies, manipulation, rhetorical trickery, superstition and cult psychology. Then use what you have learned to examine the scientific merit of Intelligent Design. Fuck, I just convinced myself that we *should* be teaching ID!! And teaching it well, so people understand exactly what it is, what the claims are, what evidence exists (or doesn't) to support those claims, how the message is carefully crafted for specific effect, and how the whole thing relates and compares to actual scientific work. Once we have this curriculum ready, any time some idiotic state passes a law like this schools in that jurisdiction would be able to turn to it to maintain their standards. Make it so!
s/ on / one /
Nope. Electrons and photons still moving at the speed of light, which is relatively constant. (c what I did there?!?)
Ok, mostly I'm just being a smart ass. This may improve throughput and/or latency. But our chips are running into constraints due to the fact that the electrons can only go so far in on clock cycle. The stuff is cool, but it's not going to fix those problems.
Some sources are reporting that the whole way there the robot kept saying "P. Sherman 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney!!"
Also, this is what his wife looks like: https://www.google.com/search?q=Holly+Petraeus&tbm=isch
Maybe. But most of the time they don't prosecute things like this, even though they are technically in violation. This is high profile enough that it might get a different response. My bet, though, is that they let him slip into retirement as quietly as possible.
FWIW, this is what she looks like: https://www.google.com/search?q=Paula+Broadwell&tbm=isch
Yes, some people are trying to do that. That's the point. The way to fight it is to get some solid legal precedents established that clearly state that citizens have the right to record in public, including police doing their duty. Any decision that establishes that right or builds towards it helps. And this one might be a building block that helps the case.
Forget swallowing or stuffing the c4. The new fear is surgical insertion of explosives. Body bombs. Check out these links:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/13/al-qaeda-s-body-bombs-al-asiri-s-next-threat.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/officials-fear-terrorists-body-bombs-us-bound-planes/story?id=16245827
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18161870
I hope someone will soon put to the legal test the assertion that what this allows police to do without a warrant can be done by any citizen, including by any citizen towards the police. This may help to support the rights of citizens to record police officers while they are on duty. Hey, if any property that doesn't have a building on it is fair game for surveillance, by anyone, it opens up opportunity for all of the citizenry. Not saying I like this, but maybe there is a positive side to it.
Yeah, and the "who".
Their thought: "hey, well catch the bad guys who are trying to get around security!"
Reality: they catch the nerds who know how to hack barcodes and want to save 10 minutes of waiting in a security line.
But this is giving them too much credit. They are not thinking that far ahead. They are still stuck on shoe bombs (22 Dec 2001).
If this sounds a little familiar, well, it is... http://it.slashdot.org/story/12/10/24/2222225/ But I like the tie in with the /. logo today. Will that logo get me a faster screening?
Yes. That's what jumped out at me too. Revealing medical mistakes is a reason to do *more* autopsies. And any doctors or hospitals who are "uncomfortable" with that need to get out of the business. If you are not interested in having some QC to improve your processes, I don't want you involved in my medical care.
Why are you explaining and asking permission to use a tool? Download git, install it, use it, done. Standard practice, free, so what's the issue? Just do it. The management doesn't want to see how the sausage is made.
Also, there is a "manage your management" issue here. When the bosses ask if you need anything, you need to provide answers that they understand and can accomplish. Asking for something they don't understand and don't know how to get for you leads to them feeling stupid and ineffective. Line up your own tools without bothering them. When they ask what you need be ready with something that they can easily accomplish, like stocking the fridge with Mt. Dew.
Well if the ER just gives the patient more homeopathic treatment it will save those 10s of thousands of pounds. Mission accomplished.
BTW, reading your .sig, I should have sprinkled my post liberally with ~s.
To some extent I am just being a smart-ass agitator. But the serious point within the snarking is that large health care institutions like NHS or Medicare don't care if you are healthy. They just want you to live and die while pulling as few dollars as possible from the pool, and without making a fuss that will cause them trouble. No one judges the administrators of these programs by how healthy the people in their program are.
There is zero scientific evidence homeopathy works. Absolutely none.
Wrong. Your problem is in your definition of "works". Works mean achieves some goal you were trying to reach, and perhaps the goal you are thinking of is not the one NHS is trying to reach. Their job is not to cure everyone of everything. Their job is to *control expenses* while *minimizing complaints*. And it is very likely that providing homeopathy will help achieve those goals. Therefore it "works". Remember, even the homeopathy supporters admit that often treatments do not contain even a single molecule of the diluted substance. (cite ) I cannot think of a more cost effective treatment than water, maybe with a bit of food coloring. Even a small reduction in whining would make it cost effective. From an institutional health perspective it's pure genius!!
Our vocal chords make clicks. In very low tones I can hear the individual clicks. I can see it being possible to for a person to gain the control over their voice to be able to make a single click, then do that at whatever interval they want. That doesn't really seem like a "tone" to me, but this must be what they are doing here.
Feynman reveled in the multitude of phenomena that we do not yet understand, and he had a way of sharing that fascination and excitement with the student/listener/reader. Many of his lectures, to me at least, seem to primarily be attempts to describe the landscape of science, which things are known and where there is unexplored territory, or at least unanswered questions. And the picture he paints indicates that what we understand is a small percentage of the world/universe around us. There are so many basic things that we can observe, describe, and even predict, but we don't actually understand how they work. Like gravity.
Smart people are a threat to those who hold power. Especially the subset of smart people who are politically engaged and willing to put themselves at risk to protest and demand change. And among them, the subset who are world famous and therefore have easy access to the press, well, they are just beyond dangerous.
There is a long history of new dictatorial regimes wiping out, killing, or scaring away all of the educated class, thus making the general populace less likely to organize, garner international attention, or outsmart anyone in the regime. This fits the pattern.
Careful selection of the crew for the first manned mission to the sun could dramatically improve the quality of political discourse here on earth. (Think "B Ark")
Well, I don't know if any of those really have "value", except possibly the image sorting. But in all cases I can probably build algorithms that do it faster, cheaper, and possibly better than the average person getting paid a dollar an hour to do it.
First of all, as someone who's work in parallel computing for a while, I think it's actually quite hard to define tasks that actually have value that can be broken down into such small and easy sub-tasks. And within the set of problems where you can do that, there is a pretty large overlap between what a completely untrained person can do and what a perl script can do. So the whole idea of an army of anonymous random humans adding microvalue that adds up to big value is problematic for me. Maybe there is theoretical value there, but so many things could go wrong.
Secondly, if you can clearly define a task like that, and what it is worth to you, why restrict your solution to humans? Provide an API and let me try to solve it algorithmically. If all you care about is getting the task done, what does it matter whether I get it done with a dozen Indian subcontractors, a thousand trained monkeys, or a clever little genetic algorithm?