If it wasn't for the armed forces investing lots of money in this stuff in the last 3/4 of a century most of you kiddies wouldn't have a job today except maybe factory work
First, all that money comes from taxpayers ("you kiddies"). Second, what you say just means spending on research enables discoveries and new engineering. There's no reason why that spending has to be military. It may even be the case that, had the money been spent on non-military applications, then the taxpayers would have received an even better bang-for-buck.
You mean to say that you wrote a negative review of the movie. Not that writing a bad review is ever justification to receive death threats, but now you're at risk of getting hate mail from the grammar Nazis too.
The problem with mail-in voting is that it's possible to coerce people to vote a certain way. I'm not even talking about broad conspiracies to alter the vote en masse. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if many spouses said they were voting one way, for the sake of marital harmony, but in fact voted another.
If the time doctors have to spend with patients is so scarce then this is a sign that we need more doctors (or fewer patients). However, the guild is against increasing the number of doctors because it would create wage competition and lower doctor salaries.
Pre-process the training data so that exactly half of the input is from male applicants, and half from female. If there are more male entries in the complete dataset, then randomly remove them until it's exactly 50:50. Yes, this means tossing out potentially valuable information. However, if male applicants make it to the top 5, then they could be further compared against each other using the full male dataset. Surely if I thought of this in 5 sec they could too?
If the problem is that not enough women are in the training data, then it's not a problem with the method, but rather an indication that they don't have good data. Fixing this problem will take time, as it will require populating the dataset by hiring more women.
Why have brackets?... Have a function that is asymptotic to both 0 (at the low end) and 60% (at the high end).
I actually like this idea (continuous function) a lot, but even though plugging in 1 number into a single equation is a lot simpler, it might actually be easier in practice to amend the laws by just adding a few more discrete brackets. However, I'd argue that a continuous function should be asymptotic to 100%. For example, if you earned a trillion dollars a year, then most of the income in the multi-multi-billion range would be taxed at > 99%. Yes, this is a disincentive to maximize income, and since there's more to life than making obscene amounts of money, that's an acceptable side-effect of this kind of revenue generation.
If the IRS just sends people how much they think should be paid, then we mightn't have to worry about the complexity of making the calculation, either.
However, a lot of people below the poverty line don't even qualify to pay income tax (which, as others have mentioned, doesn't mean they don't pay taxes, just that those taxes are collected in other ways, e.g. sales taxes etc.). It would make sense for the lower bound (0%) to reach this same value. The bureaucratic overhead in taxing poor people's income is just not worth it, especially when they already pay a disproportionate amount of their earnings on taxes anyway.
... and you have an absolute guarantee you don't lose money by getting a raise.
That's already the case. The brackets only charge a higher rate on income in that bracket. If you make $210,000, you only pay 35% on that final $10,000 beyond the $200,000.
Here are the tax brackets in the US. Why stop at 37% for income greater than $500,000? We could several more brackets, for example:
45% for income greater than $1 million
65% for income greater than $10 million
85% for income greater than $100 million.
Then, maybe we could fund our civic institutions without having to resort to "charity" from billionaires, and in a way which is held accountable. Even more effective, however, would probably be to root out tax evasion and offshore banking.
What fraction of these students have a smartphone with a data plan? That's a few hundred dollars per year right there.
How much have these colleges and universities spent on luxurious campuses and sports facilities which could instead have been "spent" on (saved for) lower tuition?
The solution to the issue of Fake News seems obvious enough: teach people how to think critically.
Agreed. Furthermore, there are more direct, and appropriate, solutions for combating mob violence than government censorship. People who commit violent crimes should be put on trial and sent to jail.
Everything melted into mist. Sometimes, indeed, you could put your finger on a definite lie. It was not true, for example, as was claimed in the Party history books, that the Party had invented aeroplanes. He remembered aeroplanes since his earliest childhood. But you could prove nothing.
I think the idea is to set up a system where no one is in complete control. In this way, even if the founders change their minds, it doesn't matter because the system is de-centralized. Whether or not such a system is feasible, or popular, remains to be seen.
You're right -- the current water temperature in Cape Cod is 5 to 6 degrees C. I was confused because the summary was poorly worded:
1. The units of temperature weren't included
2. The title says that it's cold "outside," which to me implied that the "6 degrees" temperature was the outside temperature
3. Today's low in Brewster, MA is 7 degrees Fahrenheit, which is consistent with the "6 degrees" quoted above as referring to the outdoor temperature, in Fahrenheit.
But this wouldn't be Slashdot if it had a clear summary, would it?
If the OS were GPL'ed, then the source code would have to be made available upon request. Making the source code available would mitigate much of the concern that the OS is not trustworthy, as in principle third parties could look for flaws and undocumented features.
No, nobody got forced to evolved. Rather, the theory of evolution by natural selection predicts that those cetaceans without large brains were selected against. As a result, the only whales or dolphins who remained (i.e. reproduced) were those with larger brains.
George orwell wrote about the curious effects of mechanization on our motivation to work, and even on what we consider to be work or leisure. I strongly recommend giving it a read.
Here am I, working eight
hours a day in an insurance office; in my spare time I want to do something
'creative', so I choose to do a bit of carpentering--to make myself a
table, for instance. Notice that from the very start there is a touch of
artificiality about the whole business, for the factories can turn me out a
far better table than I can make for myself. But even when I get to work on
my table, it is not possible for me to feel towards it as the cabinet-maker
of a hundred years ago felt towards his table, still less as Robinson
Crusoe felt towards his. For before I start, most of the work has already
been done for me by machinery. The tools I use demand the minimum of skill.
I can get, for instance, planes which will cut out any moulding; the
cabinet-maker of a hundred years ago would have had to do the work with
chisel and gouge, which demanded real skill of eye and hand. The boards I
buy are ready planed and the legs are ready turned by the lathe. I can even
go to the wood-shop and buy all the parts of the table ready-made and only
needing to be fitted together; my work being reduced to driving in a few
pegs and using a piece of sandpaper. And if this is so at present, in the
mechanized future it will be enormously more so. With the tools and
materials available then, there will be no possibility of mistake, hence no
room for skill. Making a table will be easier and duller than peeling a
potato.
As a matter of fact I know quite a number of people who no longer own a computer and do all their personal tasks ONLY on a smartphone.
Smartphones are computers -- in fact, because they fit in our pockets and come with with "personal assistants," they are the most "Personal Computers" we have ever had!
Sure, it's easy to splurge on these luxuries when you play financial double Irish-Dutch sandwich games. How about putting tax money back into society, like everyone else does?
Slashdot Mirror
All Slashdot articles place the link to the right of the headline, next to the little icons.
The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly, Google+.
First, all that money comes from taxpayers ("you kiddies"). Second, what you say just means spending on research enables discoveries and new engineering. There's no reason why that spending has to be military. It may even be the case that, had the money been spent on non-military applications, then the taxpayers would have received an even better bang-for-buck.
You mean to say that you wrote a negative review of the movie. Not that writing a bad review is ever justification to receive death threats, but now you're at risk of getting hate mail from the grammar Nazis too.
The problem with mail-in voting is that it's possible to coerce people to vote a certain way. I'm not even talking about broad conspiracies to alter the vote en masse. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if many spouses said they were voting one way, for the sake of marital harmony, but in fact voted another.
If the time doctors have to spend with patients is so scarce then this is a sign that we need more doctors (or fewer patients). However, the guild is against increasing the number of doctors because it would create wage competition and lower doctor salaries.
Pre-process the training data so that exactly half of the input is from male applicants, and half from female. If there are more male entries in the complete dataset, then randomly remove them until it's exactly 50:50. Yes, this means tossing out potentially valuable information. However, if male applicants make it to the top 5, then they could be further compared against each other using the full male dataset. Surely if I thought of this in 5 sec they could too?
If the problem is that not enough women are in the training data, then it's not a problem with the method, but rather an indication that they don't have good data. Fixing this problem will take time, as it will require populating the dataset by hiring more women.
Why have brackets? ... Have a function that is asymptotic to both 0 (at the low end) and 60% (at the high end).
I actually like this idea (continuous function) a lot, but even though plugging in 1 number into a single equation is a lot simpler, it might actually be easier in practice to amend the laws by just adding a few more discrete brackets. However, I'd argue that a continuous function should be asymptotic to 100%. For example, if you earned a trillion dollars a year, then most of the income in the multi-multi-billion range would be taxed at > 99%. Yes, this is a disincentive to maximize income, and since there's more to life than making obscene amounts of money, that's an acceptable side-effect of this kind of revenue generation.
If the IRS just sends people how much they think should be paid, then we mightn't have to worry about the complexity of making the calculation, either.
However, a lot of people below the poverty line don't even qualify to pay income tax (which, as others have mentioned, doesn't mean they don't pay taxes, just that those taxes are collected in other ways, e.g. sales taxes etc.). It would make sense for the lower bound (0%) to reach this same value. The bureaucratic overhead in taxing poor people's income is just not worth it, especially when they already pay a disproportionate amount of their earnings on taxes anyway.
... and you have an absolute guarantee you don't lose money by getting a raise.
That's already the case. The brackets only charge a higher rate on income in that bracket. If you make $210,000, you only pay 35% on that final $10,000 beyond the $200,000.
Then, maybe we could fund our civic institutions without having to resort to "charity" from billionaires, and in a way which is held accountable. Even more effective, however, would probably be to root out tax evasion and offshore banking.
I guess Apple didn't have enough mobility, flexibility, or initiative.
What fraction of these students have a smartphone with a data plan? That's a few hundred dollars per year right there.
How much have these colleges and universities spent on luxurious campuses and sports facilities which could instead have been "spent" on (saved for) lower tuition?
Agreed. Furthermore, there are more direct, and appropriate, solutions for combating mob violence than government censorship. People who commit violent crimes should be put on trial and sent to jail.
This is straight out of 1984.
I think the idea is to set up a system where no one is in complete control. In this way, even if the founders change their minds, it doesn't matter because the system is de-centralized. Whether or not such a system is feasible, or popular, remains to be seen.
But this wouldn't be Slashdot if it had a clear summary, would it?
Saltwater freezes at 28.4 degrees Fahrenheit. How did these sharks get so cold if they were underwater?
If the OS were GPL'ed, then the source code would have to be made available upon request. Making the source code available would mitigate much of the concern that the OS is not trustworthy, as in principle third parties could look for flaws and undocumented features.
No, nobody got forced to evolved. Rather, the theory of evolution by natural selection predicts that those cetaceans without large brains were selected against. As a result, the only whales or dolphins who remained (i.e. reproduced) were those with larger brains.
Don't buy it.
George orwell wrote about the curious effects of mechanization on our motivation to work, and even on what we consider to be work or leisure. I strongly recommend giving it a read.
As a matter of fact I know quite a number of people who no longer own a computer and do all their personal tasks ONLY on a smartphone.
Smartphones are computers -- in fact, because they fit in our pockets and come with with "personal assistants," they are the most "Personal Computers" we have ever had!
Radeon RX Vega On Linux: High-Performance GPUs & Open-Source No Longer An Oxymoron
Who ... wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?
Apparently 13.5 million people do.
Sure, it's easy to splurge on these luxuries when you play financial double Irish-Dutch sandwich games. How about putting tax money back into society, like everyone else does?