A kilt is an absolutely delightful item of clothing. It's not quite as nice in the summer as the thin skimpy things women wear, but it's a lot better than pants.
Men's clothes are strongly driven by tradition. I think of fashion as something that changes regularly. Men the world over generally mimic a particular style of British dress: shirt and pants, jacket because it's always raining, and something around your neck to keep you warm.
"As it stands if I misplace or lose my RFID chipped access card I could end up having to take a week or so of leave."
Why?? The point of RFID is that the things are basically disposable. Lose the card? Okay, we'll cancel that number in the database and here's a new card. Be more careful.
Last time I locked my hotel RFID card in the room they made me one in about ten seconds.
Reminds me of my first high flight in a hang glider. Unless you're quite light, you generally don't have the luxury of flying with an instructor. So you learn control of the glider on small hills. You do hundreds of takeoffs and landings, concentrating on straight flight, crosswind, flare, etc. But when the time comes, you find the highest mountain you can (to give you maximum time to figure things out before you have to land) and go. Standard at my school was a 3000 foot peak, which gave you about ten minutes to learn how to turn, before you had to get serious about flying an approach, and a giant field at the bottom so you didn't have to be too exact on that approach.
We didn't have a computer simulator, but we did spend a fair amount of time hanging from rafters going through the motions. And practicing weight shift control while piloting shopping carts.
Simulators can't teach you everything, but they can teach you quite a bit, and that makes learning the tactile bits easier when you're in the air.
It was a beauty pageant. But the answer is not necessarily a platitude. When someone asks you why 20% of your fellow citizens can't identify their own country on a map, the responsible, thoughtful person acknowledges there's a problem and resists the urge to prescribe the solution in twenty seconds or less.
Should have put that in quotes. The question was: (not sure if this is an exact quote) "1/5 of Americans can't find the US on a world map. What do you think?"
Since US national beauty pageants are at least theoretically supposed to have an intellectual component, and the winners do become kind of celebrities, and people listen to celebrities (for some reason), a mild question about the state of education in the country doesn't seem unreasonable. I don't really see how it's a trick question.
She was clearly flustered at getting something approaching a real question, but someone who is supposedly a paragon of poise and grace, and is going to be a national role model, really should have been able to muster a "we clearly have serious challenges regarding education in this country" possibly followed up with "I think education, particularly regarding the place of our nation in the world, is an area my generation can improve."
Modern economic theory is founded on the idea that economics (the money/production kind) is not a zero sum game. That's true to an extent, but it requires ever more efficiency since real resources, at least up to this point in time, ARE finite. Problem is, there are physical limits to how much efficiency can be increased.
The economic run we've had since WWII has been about both increasing resource availability and efficiency, shading more and more into the latter as it got harder and harder to open up new oilfields, mines, etc. Now we're approaching both the limits of efficiency and the limits of our resources. People are starting to have to think creatively to keep the train going.
"Socialist" is an odd term, and basically meaningless. Americans have been convinced that it's a synonym for communist. The National Socialist Party rose to power in Germany in no small part because of a fear of communists.
There's research that shows the more you pay a CEO, the poorer they perform. That $500,000 a year CEO (better, get one for $250k) is likely to do better than the one you're paying $30 million.
The alternative is properly harnessed capitalism. You want to preserve rewards for people who are productive, but you need to keep those rewards in check. The modern social democracies seem to have found the right balance. The US has been pretty close in the past, but seems to be migrating more and more away from it recently.
When the gap between rich and poor gets too big, heads roll.
"Sure, people may sometimes trade them for other goods or services."
Yes. A currency. Possibly a shitty one.
There's a Pacific island where they used large rocks for currency. They had to be brought from other islands. The rocks were so big that nobody actually wanted to move them much, so they just kept records about who owned which rock. One day a boat carrying a new rock from far away sank just off the island. Even though nobody could see the rock, everyone knew it was there. Still counts, decided the islanders.
The bar to be a currency is pretty low. Bitcoin is definitely a currency. Not a very good one.
That's not how it works. Instrument noise like that doesn't change slowly. It's random thermal, electrical and sometimes quantum noise that changes on extremely small timescales.
What you describe would be like taking two pictures with the lens cap on and finding you got the same noise pattern. Oh, but I took them quickly!
I'm not sure I understand. What do you think an unemployed fund manager is going to do? Their job is flipping coins and convincing people they're brilliant for it. Are you fearing a wave of Harvard educated snake oil salesmen? Ponzi schemes?
It's not spitting out nonsense (generally), it's just not doing better than a person would.
The reason is that going off datamining isn't guaranteed to give you better results. YOu have to have a situation where all that data is actually meaningful.
The problem with oncology is that there are some cancers where a specific mechanism can be targeted, there's test for that situation, and a specific drug. A human can read a + on a piece of paper and prescribe the appropriate drug just as well as Watson can.
The other situation is where there isn't a magic bullet, so you have to use one of only a few more general treatments. While those have general tendencies, that's pretty well known, and there's no particular reason to think there's information in general health records that would help you do better. So again, Watson does about the same as a person would.
Slashdot Mirror
A kilt is an absolutely delightful item of clothing. It's not quite as nice in the summer as the thin skimpy things women wear, but it's a lot better than pants.
Men's clothes are strongly driven by tradition. I think of fashion as something that changes regularly. Men the world over generally mimic a particular style of British dress: shirt and pants, jacket because it's always raining, and something around your neck to keep you warm.
They've got piles of advertising for their shows on the main screen. It's not hard to find out about new content on Netflix.
Once you've chosen something, showing ads is just a good way to piss off your customers.
"As it stands if I misplace or lose my RFID chipped access card I could end up having to take a week or so of leave."
Why?? The point of RFID is that the things are basically disposable. Lose the card? Okay, we'll cancel that number in the database and here's a new card. Be more careful.
Last time I locked my hotel RFID card in the room they made me one in about ten seconds.
Reminds me of my first high flight in a hang glider. Unless you're quite light, you generally don't have the luxury of flying with an instructor. So you learn control of the glider on small hills. You do hundreds of takeoffs and landings, concentrating on straight flight, crosswind, flare, etc. But when the time comes, you find the highest mountain you can (to give you maximum time to figure things out before you have to land) and go. Standard at my school was a 3000 foot peak, which gave you about ten minutes to learn how to turn, before you had to get serious about flying an approach, and a giant field at the bottom so you didn't have to be too exact on that approach.
We didn't have a computer simulator, but we did spend a fair amount of time hanging from rafters going through the motions. And practicing weight shift control while piloting shopping carts.
Simulators can't teach you everything, but they can teach you quite a bit, and that makes learning the tactile bits easier when you're in the air.
It was a beauty pageant. But the answer is not necessarily a platitude. When someone asks you why 20% of your fellow citizens can't identify their own country on a map, the responsible, thoughtful person acknowledges there's a problem and resists the urge to prescribe the solution in twenty seconds or less.
Should have put that in quotes. The question was: (not sure if this is an exact quote) "1/5 of Americans can't find the US on a world map. What do you think?"
Since US national beauty pageants are at least theoretically supposed to have an intellectual component, and the winners do become kind of celebrities, and people listen to celebrities (for some reason), a mild question about the state of education in the country doesn't seem unreasonable. I don't really see how it's a trick question.
She was clearly flustered at getting something approaching a real question, but someone who is supposedly a paragon of poise and grace, and is going to be a national role model, really should have been able to muster a "we clearly have serious challenges regarding education in this country" possibly followed up with "I think education, particularly regarding the place of our nation in the world, is an area my generation can improve."
It is a zero sum game. He said "resources."
Modern economic theory is founded on the idea that economics (the money/production kind) is not a zero sum game. That's true to an extent, but it requires ever more efficiency since real resources, at least up to this point in time, ARE finite. Problem is, there are physical limits to how much efficiency can be increased.
The economic run we've had since WWII has been about both increasing resource availability and efficiency, shading more and more into the latter as it got harder and harder to open up new oilfields, mines, etc. Now we're approaching both the limits of efficiency and the limits of our resources. People are starting to have to think creatively to keep the train going.
"Socialist" is an odd term, and basically meaningless. Americans have been convinced that it's a synonym for communist. The National Socialist Party rose to power in Germany in no small part because of a fear of communists.
There's research that shows the more you pay a CEO, the poorer they perform. That $500,000 a year CEO (better, get one for $250k) is likely to do better than the one you're paying $30 million.
The alternative is properly harnessed capitalism. You want to preserve rewards for people who are productive, but you need to keep those rewards in check. The modern social democracies seem to have found the right balance. The US has been pretty close in the past, but seems to be migrating more and more away from it recently.
When the gap between rich and poor gets too big, heads roll.
What was inappropriate or a trick about the question? 1/5 of Americans can't find the US on a world map. What do you think?
Well, that's what the questions are supposed to be about. See, it's not all bikinis! We care about the girls' minds too!
She ended up coming third, so... success?
"Sure, people may sometimes trade them for other goods or services."
Yes. A currency. Possibly a shitty one.
There's a Pacific island where they used large rocks for currency. They had to be brought from other islands. The rocks were so big that nobody actually wanted to move them much, so they just kept records about who owned which rock. One day a boat carrying a new rock from far away sank just off the island. Even though nobody could see the rock, everyone knew it was there. Still counts, decided the islanders.
The bar to be a currency is pretty low. Bitcoin is definitely a currency. Not a very good one.
I think I spotted your problem. Stop bailing out banks that give high risk loans to their buddies.
That's not how it works. Instrument noise like that doesn't change slowly. It's random thermal, electrical and sometimes quantum noise that changes on extremely small timescales.
What you describe would be like taking two pictures with the lens cap on and finding you got the same noise pattern. Oh, but I took them quickly!
Where I'm from, we call that BBQ weather!
So you're saying yes, this IS Vice's kind of thing?
Occam's razor says everyone cheated, until "everyone" is more than a couple of people.
Anybody who believes a single claim, or a single paper, is a sucker.
I'm not sure I understand. What do you think an unemployed fund manager is going to do? Their job is flipping coins and convincing people they're brilliant for it. Are you fearing a wave of Harvard educated snake oil salesmen? Ponzi schemes?
I have a password (internet) and pin (RL) with my credit card. Have for more than a decade. I donâ(TM)t live in the US.
Thereâ(TM)s something weird about banks and the US market.
So sad. Big company that makes lots of money doesnâ(TM)t bother with proper security, gets hacked, goes bankrupt.
Maybe it will finally happen. Losing banksâ(TM) money is sure to be taken more seriously than screwing with peopleâ(TM)s lives.
Blockchains aren't particularly difficult to understand. The BS "explanations" made up by people who don't really understand them are.
The proof of stake blockchains would like to disagree with you.
Sure it is. It's just a really shitty one.
It's not spitting out nonsense (generally), it's just not doing better than a person would.
The reason is that going off datamining isn't guaranteed to give you better results. YOu have to have a situation where all that data is actually meaningful.
The problem with oncology is that there are some cancers where a specific mechanism can be targeted, there's test for that situation, and a specific drug. A human can read a + on a piece of paper and prescribe the appropriate drug just as well as Watson can.
The other situation is where there isn't a magic bullet, so you have to use one of only a few more general treatments. While those have general tendencies, that's pretty well known, and there's no particular reason to think there's information in general health records that would help you do better. So again, Watson does about the same as a person would.