They probably would if they were injured and filed for it--- most employment laws, like worker's comp, are based on whether the overall character of the position was of an employment-type relationship (i.e. you go into a worksite during regular hours, have something to do for the company, have a boss, etc.). Most of these unpaid interns are probably legally employees, despite the company's illegal classification of them otherwise, and if they got injured, the company would likely be on the hook.
I don't think it's only "very, very few people" who get caught up in scams; they're quite widespread in a lot of areas. Here, a large number of people are told that this is the only way to break into an industry, and if enough of them believe it, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They were a bit ahead early on, but not by that much. Here's an incomplete timeline of some firsts:
October 1957: Sputnik 1, first satellite [USSR] November 1957: Sputnik 2, first space capsule capable of sustaining life (contained a dog) [USSR] January 1958: Explorer 1, first U.S. satellite, first to carry scientific instruments [USA] March 1958: Vanguard 1, first solar-powered satellite [USA] May 1958: Sputnik 3, first Soviet satellite to carry scientific instruments (but tape recorder failed, so collected no data) [USSR] December 1958: Project SCORE, first communications satellite [USA] February 1959: Vanguard 2, first weather satellite (though didn't collect much useful data) [USA] April 1960: TIROS-1, first successful weather satellite [USA] August 1960: Sputnik 5, first roundtrip of living animals (40 mice) in a capsule [USSR] April 1961: Vostok 1, first human in space [USSR] May 1961: Freedom 7, first American in space [USA]
I do, and don't see much of that from top coders. If you go to cultural events like SuperHappyDevHouse, meetups at the Hacker Dojo, etc., there are a handful of mohawked/pierced types, but not many. Maybe up in SF proper (as opposed to Silicon Valley) there are more, but I haven't seen 'em.
Now if you're talking web designers, yeah, there's lots of those.
If there were a noticeable decrease in the average weight of cars, wouldn't that actually reduce total deaths, due to lower average kinetic energies involved?
Unfortunately, absent a reform by Parliament, it looks like they might be making a "science exception" to avoid intruding into scientific controversies in particular, rather than some legal principle that would apply more generally. In particular, the UK courts have no similar problem wading into historical or political controversies, where the courts can be used to settle the correct version of history; it's only when it comes to science that they get cold feet.
It comes at it from the other direction, starting with statistics, and adding symbolic structure on top of statistics. This work is vaguely from the tradition of graphical models, which build symbolic (graph) structure on top of Bayesian statistics, except that here he's built an entire programming language (with loops and functions and the usual constructs) on top of Bayesian statistics.
A big practical stumbling block is that, like with a lot of these graphical-model-ish things, the statistics aren't actually directly computable, and his resulting programming language can't really be directly run or reasoned about. Instead you have to basically draw a whole lot of samples from the resulting model.
Yeah but then you'd lose office cred when you go out to lunch with coworkers and have to try to cover for the fact that you didn't see the Slashdot post that went up hours ago that they're all discussing!
More that he's a legitimate researcher making technically sound contributions to AI conferences that are peer-reviewed and so on. From the phrasing "grand unified theory of AI", someone might mistake him from one of the sorts that just rambles on about the singularity, with hugely overblown claims and not much substance (i.e. no working systems).
I should add that this is interesting research from a legitimate AI researcher, not some kooky fringe AI. I suspect it may have been his PR department more to blame than him, and his actual academic papers make no similarly overblown claims, and provide pretty fair positioning of how his work relates to existing work.
You can't copyright facts though, so it's not clear they would own the dataset, depending on how it were created. For example, while Facebook owns the actual literal webpages on facebook.com, it's questionable whether they own the friend graph, which is simply a fact about how people choose to associate themselves.
Mostly, he or his university are just really good at overselling. There are dozens of attempts to combine something like probabilistic inference with something more like logical inference, many of which have associated languages, and it's not clear this one solves any of the problems they have any better.
They describe it themselves: they're using the government as part of a "monetization strategy" for an "alternative content channel".
I do think there's a role for government to play in dispute resolution, but when it gets to the point where the dispute is the common case, something is clearly wrong, and it's worth reconsidering whether the rules are correctly written, i.e. whether they're something that should be enforced with government power to begin with.
I don't think there was ever a version that was pure software emulation. The earliest models had more or less a hardware PS2 inside of them. The 2nd-gen models ditched the hardware Emotion Engine (basically the PS2's CPU) and emulated that in software, but kept a hardware GS (basically the GPU).
But you're missing all the important, freedom-loving stuff the European Commission does! For example, just a week ago, the Commission made an important clarification to the law on padded waistcoats.
It is of course quite plain that winter jackets "are generally worn over other clothing and ensure a protection against the weather (citation omitted) and, consequently, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles falling within those headings must have long sleeves." But you see, this leaves us with a grievous omission as regards padded waistcoats.
For "padded waistcoats, despite the fact that they have no sleeves at all, should be covered by [the jacket-related] headings because they are worn over all other clothing for protection against the weather, and because of their padding."
Therefore, the Commission has made an important proclamation: "By derogation from the first paragraph those headings shall include padded waistcoats, despite the fact that they have no sleeves."
Corporate spokesmen are the Baghdad Bobs of capitalism: there to tell you everything is going great, there is no enemy in sight for hundreds of miles, if there is an enemy he was routed by our glorious products. Up until the moment the spokesman himself is laid off.
Flash got nearly 100% browser penetration long before YouTube existed, though, and the reasons for that are still some of the main reasons Flash is used. In addition to complaints about online video, lots of the complaints would include things like, "I can't play FarmVille or Bejeweled Blitz anymore".
Slashdot Mirror
They probably would if they were injured and filed for it--- most employment laws, like worker's comp, are based on whether the overall character of the position was of an employment-type relationship (i.e. you go into a worksite during regular hours, have something to do for the company, have a boss, etc.). Most of these unpaid interns are probably legally employees, despite the company's illegal classification of them otherwise, and if they got injured, the company would likely be on the hook.
I don't think it's only "very, very few people" who get caught up in scams; they're quite widespread in a lot of areas. Here, a large number of people are told that this is the only way to break into an industry, and if enough of them believe it, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They were a bit ahead early on, but not by that much. Here's an incomplete timeline of some firsts:
October 1957: Sputnik 1, first satellite [USSR]
November 1957: Sputnik 2, first space capsule capable of sustaining life (contained a dog) [USSR]
January 1958: Explorer 1, first U.S. satellite, first to carry scientific instruments [USA]
March 1958: Vanguard 1, first solar-powered satellite [USA]
May 1958: Sputnik 3, first Soviet satellite to carry scientific instruments (but tape recorder failed, so collected no data) [USSR]
December 1958: Project SCORE, first communications satellite [USA]
February 1959: Vanguard 2, first weather satellite (though didn't collect much useful data) [USA]
April 1960: TIROS-1, first successful weather satellite [USA]
August 1960: Sputnik 5, first roundtrip of living animals (40 mice) in a capsule [USSR]
April 1961: Vostok 1, first human in space [USSR]
May 1961: Freedom 7, first American in space [USA]
I do, and don't see much of that from top coders. If you go to cultural events like SuperHappyDevHouse, meetups at the Hacker Dojo, etc., there are a handful of mohawked/pierced types, but not many. Maybe up in SF proper (as opposed to Silicon Valley) there are more, but I haven't seen 'em.
Now if you're talking web designers, yeah, there's lots of those.
If there were a noticeable decrease in the average weight of cars, wouldn't that actually reduce total deaths, due to lower average kinetic energies involved?
See here.
Unfortunately, absent a reform by Parliament, it looks like they might be making a "science exception" to avoid intruding into scientific controversies in particular, rather than some legal principle that would apply more generally. In particular, the UK courts have no similar problem wading into historical or political controversies, where the courts can be used to settle the correct version of history; it's only when it comes to science that they get cold feet.
It comes at it from the other direction, starting with statistics, and adding symbolic structure on top of statistics. This work is vaguely from the tradition of graphical models, which build symbolic (graph) structure on top of Bayesian statistics, except that here he's built an entire programming language (with loops and functions and the usual constructs) on top of Bayesian statistics.
A big practical stumbling block is that, like with a lot of these graphical-model-ish things, the statistics aren't actually directly computable, and his resulting programming language can't really be directly run or reasoned about. Instead you have to basically draw a whole lot of samples from the resulting model.
Quite a few papers at his site.
This UAI 2008 paper is a good overview of the language.
Which is the 90%? There are a whole lot of currents in mainstream AI, and probably the plurality is non-symbolic (statistical ML is huge).
Yeah but then you'd lose office cred when you go out to lunch with coworkers and have to try to cover for the fact that you didn't see the Slashdot post that went up hours ago that they're all discussing!
More that he's a legitimate researcher making technically sound contributions to AI conferences that are peer-reviewed and so on. From the phrasing "grand unified theory of AI", someone might mistake him from one of the sorts that just rambles on about the singularity, with hugely overblown claims and not much substance (i.e. no working systems).
I should add that this is interesting research from a legitimate AI researcher, not some kooky fringe AI. I suspect it may have been his PR department more to blame than him, and his actual academic papers make no similarly overblown claims, and provide pretty fair positioning of how his work relates to existing work.
You can't copyright facts though, so it's not clear they would own the dataset, depending on how it were created. For example, while Facebook owns the actual literal webpages on facebook.com, it's questionable whether they own the friend graph, which is simply a fact about how people choose to associate themselves.
Mostly, he or his university are just really good at overselling. There are dozens of attempts to combine something like probabilistic inference with something more like logical inference, many of which have associated languages, and it's not clear this one solves any of the problems they have any better.
They describe it themselves: they're using the government as part of a "monetization strategy" for an "alternative content channel".
I do think there's a role for government to play in dispute resolution, but when it gets to the point where the dispute is the common case, something is clearly wrong, and it's worth reconsidering whether the rules are correctly written, i.e. whether they're something that should be enforced with government power to begin with.
It's the classic corporate-welfare strategy: you failed in the market, so get the government to force people to pay you.
I don't think there was ever a version that was pure software emulation. The earliest models had more or less a hardware PS2 inside of them. The 2nd-gen models ditched the hardware Emotion Engine (basically the PS2's CPU) and emulated that in software, but kept a hardware GS (basically the GPU).
Oh, I guess the article already says what came of it: it's still being litigated, as Apple was granted an extension to respond to it.
They sued Apple a year ago with essentially the same complaint about the iPhone, iPod Touch, and MacBook.
But you're missing all the important, freedom-loving stuff the European Commission does! For example, just a week ago, the Commission made an important clarification to the law on padded waistcoats.
It is of course quite plain that winter jackets "are generally worn over other clothing and ensure a protection against the weather (citation omitted) and, consequently, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles falling within those headings must have long sleeves." But you see, this leaves us with a grievous omission as regards padded waistcoats.
For "padded waistcoats, despite the fact that they have no sleeves at all, should be covered by [the jacket-related] headings because they are worn over all other clothing for protection against the weather, and because of their padding."
Therefore, the Commission has made an important proclamation: "By derogation from the first paragraph those headings shall include padded waistcoats, despite the fact that they have no sleeves."
IT, whether European or otherwise, has no soul
Corporate spokesmen are the Baghdad Bobs of capitalism: there to tell you everything is going great, there is no enemy in sight for hundreds of miles, if there is an enemy he was routed by our glorious products. Up until the moment the spokesman himself is laid off.
Flash got nearly 100% browser penetration long before YouTube existed, though, and the reasons for that are still some of the main reasons Flash is used. In addition to complaints about online video, lots of the complaints would include things like, "I can't play FarmVille or Bejeweled Blitz anymore".
Is the built-in AES encryption useful on Linux installations? E.g. if I scp files, will the encryption/decryption get offloaded to hardware?