As we're talking about statistics here, let call out any statement that was presented as a fact:
"With 100% certainty, we report that the study concluded with that fixed mindsets are to blame with 100% certainty.... Roughly 96 percent of the general population (with 0% margin of error) struggles with solving problems relating to statistics and probability (with 100% certainty that our test problem is representative of most real problems). Yet being a well-informed citizen in the 21st century with requires us with 100% certainty to be able to engage competently with these kinds of tasks.... "As soon as you pick up a newspaper, with 100% certainty you're confronted with so many numbers and statistics that you need to interpret correctly," says co-author Patrick Weber, with 100% certainty a graduate student in math education at the University of Regensburg in Germany. With 100% certainty, most of us fall far short of the mark."
Due to limited physical (real) space, the goal is to give the illusion of walking in a straight line when you're really walking to a circle. This can be done (up to a point) by projecting the image of a straight corridor, and rotating the mapping of virtual world to real world as the user walks.
The point of this article/video is that the illusion can be made more effective by adding haptic feedback allowing the user to feel the virtual "straight" wall with his hand. "More effective" means that the radius of the circle can be made somewhat smaller before the illusion breaks.
We still don't even have Level 5 autonomy in elevators (they have a manual override for emergencies). Maybe Tesla should try designing some elevators first.
Ask your car manufacturer which the driver is supposed to do:
1. Wait to see if the autopilot will react to a situation, and if it doesn't, then (belatedly) react yourself. (Which is probably too late.)
2. Keep alert and react as fast as you can, yourself, not presuming to trust the autopilot. (In which case, why enable the annoying thing? It's more of a hindrance.)
BTW, regarding this particular situation, if the car in front of you is blocking your view of a stopped vehicle, and suddenly swerves to avoid it at the last moment, then I figure autopilots and humans will be equally ineffective.
This is the best kind of software: one that gives an opaque authoritative answer that users are likely to just take on faith. Cheap; no quality control necessary.
No, though you can see that the original draft had it covering all public utilities, and was subsequently changed to cable and internet providers only.
All those fucking swear words fucking spruced up those old fucking jokes! It's 10 times more fucking funny! I fucking laughed so much I couldn't even fucking swear!
I've always been of two minds about this. I admire taking such an action on principle, and certainly you don't want to be in the position of taking actions you can't tolerate. But on the other hand, if all the moral people leave, you get a company full of immoral people (in this case, a company with lots of clout). Is it better to stay and push back from the inside?
But nobody else gave a damn about bringing it to market. Nobody was competing on resolution; barely-able-to-read-it resolution was "good enough". Would that pattern have been broken without Apple?
Fusion should allow us to push out the limit of our unbridled exponential population growth for an extra... decade or so. Increases the chances of the Malthusian catastrophe happening after my lifetime.
So please, we need fusion ASAP.
Oh, yeah, I guess we could start to think about some population planning too. Might be nice.
Some words, like "inflammable" and "hologram", are irreversibly broken; don't use them. (Unless communication is less important than the smug sense of superiority you get from thinking you're smarter than everyone else).
Physicists, can you come up with another name for this? I know, your definition got there first, and it's a shame, but it's time to give up and move on.
This is probably why ISPs like Comcast are trying to set up unrestricted "Guest" networks in addition to your own network. It's probably a deal with these Smart TV bastards so that the TV will never be without a connection, even if you don't give it access to your network.
The real fault seems to be in classes like AnnotationInvocationHandler or PriorityQueue (both part of the Java library), whose readObject() methods trustingly call some methods on their child objects.
AnnotationInvocationHandler calls map.entrySet(); PriorityQueue calls compare(). You just make sure the child object executes malicious code when executing those methods. For the child object, you can find a utility class such as LazyMap (from Commons) that executes a function while calling entrySet(). The function can be another utility class that executes some method by reflection (e.g. a Runtime method). These utility classes are all over the place to support functional-style or config-as-code programming.
But I think the real fault lies in those classes that execute child code during readObject(). It doesn't lie in the Commons classes that are used for the children.
Actually*, "very", or "verily" (from Middle English "verray" = true, real) does (literally) mean "literally".
* And for that matter, so does "actually". In fact, it seems that almost every word ever invented that means "truly" or "actually" or "literally" or "completely" gets degraded though overuse of hypberbole to eventually mean "quite a lot".**
Slashdot Mirror
https://xkcd.com/463/
As we're talking about statistics here, let call out any statement that was presented as a fact: "With 100% certainty, we report that the study concluded with that fixed mindsets are to blame with 100% certainty.... Roughly 96 percent of the general population (with 0% margin of error) struggles with solving problems relating to statistics and probability (with 100% certainty that our test problem is representative of most real problems). Yet being a well-informed citizen in the 21st century with requires us with 100% certainty to be able to engage competently with these kinds of tasks.... "As soon as you pick up a newspaper, with 100% certainty you're confronted with so many numbers and statistics that you need to interpret correctly," says co-author Patrick Weber, with 100% certainty a graduate student in math education at the University of Regensburg in Germany. With 100% certainty, most of us fall far short of the mark."
Due to limited physical (real) space, the goal is to give the illusion of walking in a straight line when you're really walking to a circle. This can be done (up to a point) by projecting the image of a straight corridor, and rotating the mapping of virtual world to real world as the user walks. The point of this article/video is that the illusion can be made more effective by adding haptic feedback allowing the user to feel the virtual "straight" wall with his hand. "More effective" means that the radius of the circle can be made somewhat smaller before the illusion breaks.
Follow the "raw research data" link from the original blog post, https://blog.adguard.com/en/cr...
Yes, for example this: http://www.andescotia.com/prod... which is a modern implementation of Prograph.
> distracting the drivers of oncoming cars
... or confusing the computers of nearby autonomous cars.
Update, linking to CNet still sucks.
We still don't even have Level 5 autonomy in elevators (they have a manual override for emergencies). Maybe Tesla should try designing some elevators first.
Ask your car manufacturer which the driver is supposed to do:
1. Wait to see if the autopilot will react to a situation, and if it doesn't, then (belatedly) react yourself. (Which is probably too late.)
2. Keep alert and react as fast as you can, yourself, not presuming to trust the autopilot. (In which case, why enable the annoying thing? It's more of a hindrance.)
BTW, regarding this particular situation, if the car in front of you is blocking your view of a stopped vehicle, and suddenly swerves to avoid it at the last moment, then I figure autopilots and humans will be equally ineffective.
Remember the rule of paradoxes.
He's both a traitor and a hero? This isn't just a difference of opinion: it's very easy to argue that he's both. It sounds paradoxical.
Whenever you see a paradox, the rule is: look for the flaw in your assumptions. Your assumptions might include:
This is the best kind of software: one that gives an opaque authoritative answer that users are likely to just take on faith. Cheap; no quality control necessary.
Yes there is: we don't need damned emojis for every object in the world.
http://leginfo.legislature.ca....
All those fucking swear words fucking spruced up those old fucking jokes! It's 10 times more fucking funny! I fucking laughed so much I couldn't even fucking swear!
I've always been of two minds about this. I admire taking such an action on principle, and certainly you don't want to be in the position of taking actions you can't tolerate. But on the other hand, if all the moral people leave, you get a company full of immoral people (in this case, a company with lots of clout). Is it better to stay and push back from the inside?
The exact value of pi is only relevant in a flat (Newtonian) space-time, not in general relativity.
But nobody else gave a damn about bringing it to market. Nobody was competing on resolution; barely-able-to-read-it resolution was "good enough". Would that pattern have been broken without Apple?
How about this one: a race that behaves like primates.
Fusion should allow us to push out the limit of our unbridled exponential population growth for an extra ... decade or so. Increases the chances of the Malthusian catastrophe happening after my lifetime.
So please, we need fusion ASAP.
Oh, yeah, I guess we could start to think about some population planning too. Might be nice.
Some words, like "inflammable" and "hologram", are irreversibly broken; don't use them. (Unless communication is less important than the smug sense of superiority you get from thinking you're smarter than everyone else).
Physicists, can you come up with another name for this? I know, your definition got there first, and it's a shame, but it's time to give up and move on.
Mostly likely the vector would be a Trojan that legitimately requires the microphone, like an oral translation app.
This is probably why ISPs like Comcast are trying to set up unrestricted "Guest" networks in addition to your own network. It's probably a deal with these Smart TV bastards so that the TV will never be without a connection, even if you don't give it access to your network.
The real fault seems to be in classes like AnnotationInvocationHandler or PriorityQueue (both part of the Java library), whose readObject() methods trustingly call some methods on their child objects.
AnnotationInvocationHandler calls map.entrySet(); PriorityQueue calls compare(). You just make sure the child object executes malicious code when executing those methods. For the child object, you can find a utility class such as LazyMap (from Commons) that executes a function while calling entrySet(). The function can be another utility class that executes some method by reflection (e.g. a Runtime method). These utility classes are all over the place to support functional-style or config-as-code programming.
But I think the real fault lies in those classes that execute child code during readObject(). It doesn't lie in the Commons classes that are used for the children.
Actually*, "very", or "verily" (from Middle English "verray" = true, real) does (literally) mean "literally".
* And for that matter, so does "actually". In fact, it seems that almost every word ever invented that means "truly" or "actually" or "literally" or "completely" gets degraded though overuse of hypberbole to eventually mean "quite a lot".**
** Including "quite".