If you remove the single largest factor for non-adoption (age), the rates are generally pretty high, and the other factors mentioned make less difference. That's why I wish these surveys focused more on multi-factor analysis instead of these easy-to-do but less-useful analyses where you just pull out single factors. Sure, people with lower incomes are less likely to be online, and people with lower educational attainment are less likely to be online, but those two factors also correlate strongly, and matter differently for different age cohorts. Which factors have independent effects after controlling for the others? That's the kind of analysis that would be more helpful...
So yes, 22% of Americans don't use the internet. But a large proportion of those are over 65: in that age group, 69% of people don't use the internet. That's just generational change.
If we look at young people, age 18-29, a full 94% use the internet. There is probably some education/income effect in there, but a much weaker one: only 6% of total young people, even including the poorest and least educated in the statistics, don't use the internet.
Note also that educational attainment isn't separate from the age effect, because going to college used to be less common in my grandfather's generation than it is today, so there are some confounds baked into those numbers, too.
Yeah, I think there are gender problems in the tech industry, but "brogrammers" are a pretty small slice of them. If anything, "brogrammers" would drive out most male programmers too, if the thing got in any way widespread. The last thing that will recruit most geeks to your company is for you to start acting like fratboys. What's next, hiring some football players to shove your programmers into lockers on their lunch breaks?
Yeah, this seems much closer to rebroadcasting, which you can't do unless the original broadcaster allows you to. Consider even the case where you're not changing mediums. I set up a free streaming radio station at mysite.com. You can receive this, and route it within your house or devices however you want. But what you can't do is rebroadcast my radio stream from yoursite.com, and certainly not rebroadcast it and then sell subscriptions to yoursite.com's rebroadcast of my radio station!
Yeah, that's one of the arguments I've found particularly odd, because it's not like others are putting words in the Confederates' mouths. The states each wrote declarations explaining why they seceded, which we can read to gain some insight into their stated reasons for leaving the union.
Wrong on both points: 1) the decision covered ToS in general, not only employer/employee agreements; and 2) the Ninth Circuit has plenty of conservatives on it, with its Chief Judge, who wrote this opinion, being a libertarian-leaning Reagan appointee.
It doesn't change anything, as the decision notes. The question is whether exceeding authorization to use a computer, by violating the terms of a policy authorizing you to use that computer, is a federal crime. Whether the policy is a workplace policy for employee usage of computers, or a user policy for customer usage of computers, doesn't make a difference.
Fortunately it does at least require that it be a TOS violation "with intent to defraud", which provides a bit higher burden of proof. It's still better not to have the CFAA in this mess at all, though. If you want to ban fraud, then write a law banning fraud (which already exist, naturally), not criminalize random things just because "with a computer" is tacked on.
In general lawyers are currently over-supplied, but lawyers who have a STEM degree in addition to their JD aren't. Still a pretty significant demand for patent law and that kind of thing.
tl;dr, liquids have to be confined to be scanned in an electron microscope because otherwise they'll evaporate due to the near-vacuum pressures, previous solutions confined them in capsules that were not so transparent, new solution uses more-transparent bubbles between graphene layers to trap liquids in
This comes up at sociology conferences now and then, in the culture clash between quantitative, qualitative, and hybrid-methodology folks. The pure-quantitative folks drive the others nuts, because if they can't answer a question out of whatever random data set they have available, it's like, huh, I guess we have no way of knowing why this is! Wouldn't want to have to leave the lab...
Editorial publications that aim at a certain style and respectability are more sensitive about what their columnists do than many other businesses are. For example, when MMA fighter Jeff Monson came out as an anarchist and vandalized the Washington capital, that would probably have been enough for him to get fired from MSNBC if he worked there, but it did not cause the MMA team he works for to fire him.
Indeed, he's even been complaining for some years that the National Review is too soft on racial issues. Here's a discussion from 2003 lamenting how younger conservatives are putting pressure on NR to avoid racialist discussion that older NR readers would've once been okay with.
One thing that's particularly interesting about Jack Tramiel is that, unlike some of the other 70s tech entrepreneurs (Woz, say), he was really from a previous generation, not natively a computer guy. But, he managed to anticipate and succeed over several technological transitions. He immigrated to the U.S. after surviving a concentration camp during WW2, and started a reasonably successful typewriter company in the 50s. That successfully transitioned to mechanical calculators in the early 60s after the typewriter market started getting too competitive and low-margin, and then once transistors started becoming affordable, he digified that line and put out a line of digital calculators in the late 60s. In fact Commodore in effect put out the first Texas Instruments calculator, using commodity circuits sourced from TI, which TI only later realized they could assemble under their own label, resulting in the now-famous TI calculator line.
Then, finally, he anticipated the home-computing trend, with Commodore releasing its first design in 1977, the same year as the Apple II.
It's not very difficult to imagine an alternate history where Commodore was a typewriter company that had a brief adding-machine phase before completely missing the digital-computing wave and going bankrupt by 1980.
Rather than attempting to personally evaluate the paper, not being an expert in this area, it'd be interesting if a third party has done some analysis, even preliminarily, on the system, so we can rely on more than the authors' own views. The paper itself was published in a somewhat strange venue for a new cryptosystem, Europhysics Letters, which isn't really a problem, but doesn't provide strong assurance that cryptography experts have vetted it, either (but perhaps they have elsewhere?).
Indeed, this seems to depend pretty heavily on the assumption that the utility functions are provided accurately. If that isn't the case, various kinds of gaming are possible. The general problem is studied as "social choice theory", and unfortunately most criteria you might put forth for a "fair" choice rule are provably impossible to satisfy. The classic Arrow Theorem for voting systems is the best-known, but there are a dozen impossibility theorems littering the combine-utility-functions landscape.
The international energy agency estimates that 80.5% of households worldwide have electricity. I don't think half of those having Wifi is completely implausible.
I would also be interested in knowing about other predictions, in particular predictions with specific numbers backed by plausible theoretical models, published in a respectable venue like Science or Nature (or some more specialized but still solidly peer-reviewed journal).
If indeed it turns out that there were a few hundred such models/predictions, and one turned out to be close to right, that would not be super impressive. But I'm not able to find those hundreds, if they exist...
I do think that's a legitimate contribution, even if it's obviously self-interested. To the extent that people use Hyper-V, it's good for Linux to have support for running under it, and it's good that Microsoft contributed the resources to make that happen instead of leaving it for other contributors to try to get it working. Similar to how Sun/Oracle employees contributed a considerable amount of the kernel's Xen support.
It is fair to be aware that that's the entirety of their contribution, so it doesn't signal some more general engagement with kernel development.
Slashdot Mirror
If you remove the single largest factor for non-adoption (age), the rates are generally pretty high, and the other factors mentioned make less difference. That's why I wish these surveys focused more on multi-factor analysis instead of these easy-to-do but less-useful analyses where you just pull out single factors. Sure, people with lower incomes are less likely to be online, and people with lower educational attainment are less likely to be online, but those two factors also correlate strongly, and matter differently for different age cohorts. Which factors have independent effects after controlling for the others? That's the kind of analysis that would be more helpful...
So yes, 22% of Americans don't use the internet. But a large proportion of those are over 65: in that age group, 69% of people don't use the internet. That's just generational change.
If we look at young people, age 18-29, a full 94% use the internet. There is probably some education/income effect in there, but a much weaker one: only 6% of total young people, even including the poorest and least educated in the statistics, don't use the internet.
Note also that educational attainment isn't separate from the age effect, because going to college used to be less common in my grandfather's generation than it is today, so there are some confounds baked into those numbers, too.
In short: Where are the goddamn crosstabs?!?
Yeah, I think there are gender problems in the tech industry, but "brogrammers" are a pretty small slice of them. If anything, "brogrammers" would drive out most male programmers too, if the thing got in any way widespread. The last thing that will recruit most geeks to your company is for you to start acting like fratboys. What's next, hiring some football players to shove your programmers into lockers on their lunch breaks?
I'd put in a good word for layabout as an enjoyable occupation, though.
So could I take your internet radio stream and set up one proxy per user, and then resell it?
Could I sell rebranded Slashdot or CNN subscriptions using that method, too?
Yeah, this seems much closer to rebroadcasting, which you can't do unless the original broadcaster allows you to. Consider even the case where you're not changing mediums. I set up a free streaming radio station at mysite.com. You can receive this, and route it within your house or devices however you want. But what you can't do is rebroadcast my radio stream from yoursite.com, and certainly not rebroadcast it and then sell subscriptions to yoursite.com's rebroadcast of my radio station!
Yeah but the alternative is Australia, land of scary fauna.
Yeah, that's one of the arguments I've found particularly odd, because it's not like others are putting words in the Confederates' mouths. The states each wrote declarations explaining why they seceded, which we can read to gain some insight into their stated reasons for leaving the union.
For example, in the "Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union", South Carolina's government makes it clear that their secession is pretty much entirely motivated by a desire to protect slavery from possibly being abolished.
Wrong on both points: 1) the decision covered ToS in general, not only employer/employee agreements; and 2) the Ninth Circuit has plenty of conservatives on it, with its Chief Judge, who wrote this opinion, being a libertarian-leaning Reagan appointee.
It doesn't change anything, as the decision notes. The question is whether exceeding authorization to use a computer, by violating the terms of a policy authorizing you to use that computer, is a federal crime. Whether the policy is a workplace policy for employee usage of computers, or a user policy for customer usage of computers, doesn't make a difference.
If you read the court's opinion, it discusses both ToS and workplace access policies, and holds that the CFAA applies to neither, for similar reasons.
Fortunately it does at least require that it be a TOS violation "with intent to defraud", which provides a bit higher burden of proof. It's still better not to have the CFAA in this mess at all, though. If you want to ban fraud, then write a law banning fraud (which already exist, naturally), not criminalize random things just because "with a computer" is tacked on.
Isn't using an epithet of Allah for an internet search engine a bit trivializing?
In general lawyers are currently over-supplied, but lawyers who have a STEM degree in addition to their JD aren't. Still a pretty significant demand for patent law and that kind of thing.
tl;dr, liquids have to be confined to be scanned in an electron microscope because otherwise they'll evaporate due to the near-vacuum pressures, previous solutions confined them in capsules that were not so transparent, new solution uses more-transparent bubbles between graphene layers to trap liquids in
This comes up at sociology conferences now and then, in the culture clash between quantitative, qualitative, and hybrid-methodology folks. The pure-quantitative folks drive the others nuts, because if they can't answer a question out of whatever random data set they have available, it's like, huh, I guess we have no way of knowing why this is! Wouldn't want to have to leave the lab...
Editorial publications that aim at a certain style and respectability are more sensitive about what their columnists do than many other businesses are. For example, when MMA fighter Jeff Monson came out as an anarchist and vandalized the Washington capital, that would probably have been enough for him to get fired from MSNBC if he worked there, but it did not cause the MMA team he works for to fire him.
Indeed, he's even been complaining for some years that the National Review is too soft on racial issues. Here's a discussion from 2003 lamenting how younger conservatives are putting pressure on NR to avoid racialist discussion that older NR readers would've once been okay with.
One thing that's particularly interesting about Jack Tramiel is that, unlike some of the other 70s tech entrepreneurs (Woz, say), he was really from a previous generation, not natively a computer guy. But, he managed to anticipate and succeed over several technological transitions. He immigrated to the U.S. after surviving a concentration camp during WW2, and started a reasonably successful typewriter company in the 50s. That successfully transitioned to mechanical calculators in the early 60s after the typewriter market started getting too competitive and low-margin, and then once transistors started becoming affordable, he digified that line and put out a line of digital calculators in the late 60s. In fact Commodore in effect put out the first Texas Instruments calculator, using commodity circuits sourced from TI, which TI only later realized they could assemble under their own label, resulting in the now-famous TI calculator line.
Then, finally, he anticipated the home-computing trend, with Commodore releasing its first design in 1977, the same year as the Apple II.
It's not very difficult to imagine an alternate history where Commodore was a typewriter company that had a brief adding-machine phase before completely missing the digital-computing wave and going bankrupt by 1980.
Rather than attempting to personally evaluate the paper, not being an expert in this area, it'd be interesting if a third party has done some analysis, even preliminarily, on the system, so we can rely on more than the authors' own views. The paper itself was published in a somewhat strange venue for a new cryptosystem, Europhysics Letters, which isn't really a problem, but doesn't provide strong assurance that cryptography experts have vetted it, either (but perhaps they have elsewhere?).
Indeed, this seems to depend pretty heavily on the assumption that the utility functions are provided accurately. If that isn't the case, various kinds of gaming are possible. The general problem is studied as "social choice theory", and unfortunately most criteria you might put forth for a "fair" choice rule are provably impossible to satisfy. The classic Arrow Theorem for voting systems is the best-known, but there are a dozen impossibility theorems littering the combine-utility-functions landscape.
The international energy agency estimates that 80.5% of households worldwide have electricity. I don't think half of those having Wifi is completely implausible.
I don't think it's nerds so much as location: you will see different wifi prevalence in, say, the United States versus Uganda.
I'm going to make a wild guess that you don't know very much about science in any field.
I would also be interested in knowing about other predictions, in particular predictions with specific numbers backed by plausible theoretical models, published in a respectable venue like Science or Nature (or some more specialized but still solidly peer-reviewed journal).
If indeed it turns out that there were a few hundred such models/predictions, and one turned out to be close to right, that would not be super impressive. But I'm not able to find those hundreds, if they exist...
I do think that's a legitimate contribution, even if it's obviously self-interested. To the extent that people use Hyper-V, it's good for Linux to have support for running under it, and it's good that Microsoft contributed the resources to make that happen instead of leaving it for other contributors to try to get it working. Similar to how Sun/Oracle employees contributed a considerable amount of the kernel's Xen support.
It is fair to be aware that that's the entirety of their contribution, so it doesn't signal some more general engagement with kernel development.