Dealing with the pro-anti-bush switch
on
Censorship By Glut
·
· Score: 1
Simple solution:
Rank the users also.
That is, someone that has an account for 4 years and been "Pro-Bush" all that time carries full voting rights of say 100 shares. But when you first sign up or switch votes to anti-bush, suddenly you go back to having '1 share', doubling to 2 in a month, 4 in 3 months, 8 in 6 months, 12 in a year, 24 in 18 months, 48 in 2 years, 100 in 4 years.
But with regards to the general idea, Amazon/Netflix already beats your base idea.
That is, they use a bayesian probability formula to say that people that like X will also like Y, thereby recommending things to you.
Maybe I'm blind, but I see zero advantage to the article's idea of having people pick their own 'groupings' instead of letting the bayseian formula deal with it.
The article DIRECTLY contradicts your premise. It states instead that when acorn trees were feeling stressed they pumped out a LOT of acorns so that if they died, their children would continue. Then when trees were doing well, they cut it back down to a reasonable amount.
Not saying you are wrong, just that your single example is only enough to question the article, not enough to create a theory.
Re:Silly to create the organization
on
Houses With Tails
·
· Score: 1, Troll
It gets tricky when problems occure. Everything is simple when things are going well. But the second some idiot with a back hoe cuts through your cable, then what? Or your routers get hacked because, hey, you're just a guy doing it on your own, not a professional being paid.
Then there's making sure all 100 people pay. Even when their house is in foreclosure. Or after they die, dealing with the estate's poorly done finances. Or simply when some new guy buys the house not udnerstanding what he is getting or what he is paying for.
Silly to create the organization
on
Houses With Tails
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
just to deal with the 'tail'. Too much administrative work to do on a volunteer basis, too little to do on a paid basis.
But it might work with a pre-existing organization such as a condo, coop or home owners association.
Obviously you don't put it in the official will they file. Basically, it goes to your executor, just like the list of financial accounts.
By "will" I meant 'the arrangements you made to deal with your estate', not the actual piece of paper. Four letters are shorter than a 9 word sentence.
You write a will.
Just as you list ALL financial accounts, you also list ALL social networking accounts. Including your passwords for these sites.
Instruct your executor to email/post as you to all about your death.
Yeah, I know, writing down passwords is not the brightest idea, but hey these are social networking accounts, not truly important things. I.E. Don't give out the key to your house, but do give out the key to your mailbox. Your account number and similar financial information that you have already given to your will is FAR more important. Therefore if you are trusting your executor with all that financial info, you should be able to trust them with a password.
If you are truly paranoid, give them a key to a safe deposit box instead of your actual passwords, then keep a copy of the passwords in the safe deposit box.
By that logic, you would advocate the use of abortion against children born with uncorrectable birth defects.
Life should be joyous. Even if you are not quite the same or as smart as others.
Also, as to 'inferior', I think that term is not appropriate.
From what I have read, Neanderthals were less creative, but otherwise as smart as humans.
Sorry, had to go for the obligatory Terminator reference.
Seriously, the organic brain is evolved, not designed. That means by definition it must be self contained . Self contained means it has to have a ton of backup, self-repair, and maintance systems. Simulatneously, being organic it competes against other organics, so does not have the same accuracy requirements. Close enough is good enough.
As such, I don't see how duplicating an organic brain is useful. We don't need what it does, but do need what it does not have.
OK, the ability to approximate is very usefull, but I think a direct attempt at that would work better than the indirect.
Because they made it easy to write shoddy code. If you make people go through hoops to get the good stuff, then they get lazy and accept the minimum.
To use a real world analogy, no, you don't need to have the same key start the car as open your front door, your mail box, and your office. If you insist on selling a car, house lock, mailbox and the office, then don't also make them use the same key for 'convience'.
And if the Add on's were given far more permission than they actually need?
If the browser works right, then the damage a poorly written add on can do should be minimal.
The instances where the fee barely covers the cost of collecting are always in less urbanized areas.
In major cities, like New York and London, the fees cover most of the cost of transportation. In fact one of the things NYC's MTA is always complaining about is that the State and Federal government give huge amounts to subsidize suburban and rural public transportation and give practically nothign to the city
Step 1. Copyright your company name.
Step 2. Then sue them for $1,000 for every time they print your company name.
Step 3. Starting with each and every legal document that mentions your company name.
Step 4. When they respond to the lawsuit, they will of course, use your company name again. Return to step 2.
The problem is, they don't have "a hole", they have swiss cheese. The reason they have swiss cheese is that the people responsible for securing their machines take 3 days to do something that should be done in ten minutes.
Most recently, a man fooling around with a home chemistry set discovered that gold flakes of a certain size heat up in the presence of low energy microwaves. Yes all metals do this, but the gold particles heated up at such a low energy that you could swallow the gold and get your body exposed to microwaves that do no significant damage except to the parts of your body that are touching the gold. As it was already known that tumors tend to accumulate heavy metals, it created a cancer treatment.
The original discovery was done within the last 10 years, no 20, and was done at someone's home, not in a lab.
I did my number on the total value of what they offered. I.E. Assuming everyone got an equal mixture of cash and stock.
If you were stupid enough to ask for Microsoft stock alone (and got it), then you would have gotten LESS than the current value of the Yahoo stock. If you were smart enough to ask for pure cash (and got it), then you would have gotten the full $30+ value.) Of course, neither of those situations were likely to happen.
Not as bad as you made it look. The MS offer involved MS stock, and if people had taken it, they would now have about $20. Still not the best decision Yahoo ever made.
1. By "Candidates pay no attention to the rest of the country. " I mean pander to those that will give them the most votes as opposed to simply their friends. Without voting, kings and would be dictators pandered to generals with soldiers, not to unarmed civilians. Much better this way. At least SOMEONE that is not their friend gets something.
2. Again, you miss the point. It is better to choose between a turd and a douche that to have a turd and a douche convince idiots to pick up guns and shoot at each other. The idea is to prevent civil war not to get someone better than a turd or a douche.
3. Not true. The worst despot of the 20th century is almost certainly Kim Jong-il. He is the son of the last North Korean leader, in other words, not democratically elected. From wikipedia "According to accepted estimates, North Korea spends $5 billion out of a gross domestic product (GDP) of $20.9 billion on the military, compared with South Korea's $24 billion out of a GDP of $1.196 trillion." Those figures pretty much tell the entire story, but the massive deaths of the 1990's famine (estimated 10% of the population died) tell the rest. He killed a higher percentage of his own people than Hitler or Stalin. Even China's great famine killed a smaller percentage of their population (but a greater number of people). This man is of BELOW average intelligence.
Uh, duh, have you HEARD of the Civil War?
And have you heard of militia? No, you don't have to swear to support the US Constitution if you join an illegal 'citizens militia'
It is EXACTLY the purpose of voting.
No, you can definitely put a lot more checks into a computer based system, if done properly. Why, because you can keep track of a lot more things.
With a paper bases system you pretty much can only do one check: Total votes in the box versus the # of votes for each issue.
With a computer based system, you can track a ton of things, including:
Total votes per machine (versus total for each candidate per machine and versus total for the polling place)
Total votes per hour (versus total for the day as well totals per each hour per candidate)
Total votes for major candidates vs. total votes for minor candidates, as broken down by machine and hour.
Also, you do burst transmissions of total votes every hour, instead of simply uploading them once at the end of the day.
And don't forget, paper receipt verification, where the holder of the paper can look online and see which way their vote was counted, but no one else knows who they voted for.
Why do these things? Each one makes it harder to commit fraud. The by machine break down means they have to screw with all the machines at a polling place equally. Four machines means four times they have to screw with it = four times they could get caught. Total votes per hour means you can detect things like a sudden influx of votes all at x time. Total votes for major candidates vs for minor candidates means you have to screw with ALL the votes, not just the one you are mainly interested. Burst transmissions every hour means you can't just screw with the votes at the end of the day, you have to do it continuously, which makes it harder to detect.
Electronic machines, if done properly, is a lot more secure because it allows for a ton more safeguards.
Wrong. You have the wrong idea of what voting is supposed to do and as such you think it has failed. Voting is not intended and is totally unsuited to 'finding the best candidate'.
What voting does is:
1. Ensure that a candidate pays some attention to the rest of the country.
2. Convince the majority of the armed forces of the country that their is an EASIER, CHEAPER, less DANGEROUS way to remove the current political leader than starting a revolution. (No, it won't work if the country is spit geographically and the minority knows it will never convince the majority of their point of view, but it will work for 90% of the problems like say a moronic Republican government that destroys the economy, the environment, the international ties, etc.)
3. Ensure that the candidate is not below average intelligence. (Yes, GWB is not below average. Not above average, but not below either).
As such, democracy works REALLY well. In the past 200 years each and every candidate has at least tried to figure out what the voting population wants, none have been below average intelligence, and we have had only a single civil war (despite a corrupt "I am not a crook" president and a two attempts to impeach).
Many forms (not all) of ethanol create more pollution than they save. The best form is that used in Brazil which is created from agricultural waste, not the US type where they grow corn just to make ethanol. As for solar, you are using outdated, false information that counts things twice. I.E. they did things like say "x amount of pollution for creating the chip and y for creating the silicon in the chip when x included y. Solar Panels, if used for their entire estimated lifespan make air pollution better. And most, if treated properly will last far beyond their estimated lifespan.
Slashdot Mirror
Rank the users also.
That is, someone that has an account for 4 years and been "Pro-Bush" all that time carries full voting rights of say 100 shares. But when you first sign up or switch votes to anti-bush, suddenly you go back to having '1 share', doubling to 2 in a month, 4 in 3 months, 8 in 6 months, 12 in a year, 24 in 18 months, 48 in 2 years, 100 in 4 years.
But with regards to the general idea, Amazon/Netflix already beats your base idea.
That is, they use a bayesian probability formula to say that people that like X will also like Y, thereby recommending things to you.
Maybe I'm blind, but I see zero advantage to the article's idea of having people pick their own 'groupings' instead of letting the bayseian formula deal with it.
Well on Long Island the squirrels are eating our pumpkins. I saw several pumpkins with large bite holes in them and two squirrels eating one.
Not saying you are wrong, just that your single example is only enough to question the article, not enough to create a theory.
It gets tricky when problems occure. Everything is simple when things are going well. But the second some idiot with a back hoe cuts through your cable, then what? Or your routers get hacked because, hey, you're just a guy doing it on your own, not a professional being paid. Then there's making sure all 100 people pay. Even when their house is in foreclosure. Or after they die, dealing with the estate's poorly done finances. Or simply when some new guy buys the house not udnerstanding what he is getting or what he is paying for.
just to deal with the 'tail'. Too much administrative work to do on a volunteer basis, too little to do on a paid basis. But it might work with a pre-existing organization such as a condo, coop or home owners association.
Obviously you don't put it in the official will they file. Basically, it goes to your executor, just like the list of financial accounts. By "will" I meant 'the arrangements you made to deal with your estate', not the actual piece of paper. Four letters are shorter than a 9 word sentence.
You write a will. Just as you list ALL financial accounts, you also list ALL social networking accounts. Including your passwords for these sites. Instruct your executor to email/post as you to all about your death. Yeah, I know, writing down passwords is not the brightest idea, but hey these are social networking accounts, not truly important things. I.E. Don't give out the key to your house, but do give out the key to your mailbox. Your account number and similar financial information that you have already given to your will is FAR more important. Therefore if you are trusting your executor with all that financial info, you should be able to trust them with a password. If you are truly paranoid, give them a key to a safe deposit box instead of your actual passwords, then keep a copy of the passwords in the safe deposit box.
By that logic, you would advocate the use of abortion against children born with uncorrectable birth defects. Life should be joyous. Even if you are not quite the same or as smart as others. Also, as to 'inferior', I think that term is not appropriate. From what I have read, Neanderthals were less creative, but otherwise as smart as humans.
Sorry, had to go for the obligatory Terminator reference. Seriously, the organic brain is evolved, not designed. That means by definition it must be self contained . Self contained means it has to have a ton of backup, self-repair, and maintance systems. Simulatneously, being organic it competes against other organics, so does not have the same accuracy requirements. Close enough is good enough. As such, I don't see how duplicating an organic brain is useful. We don't need what it does, but do need what it does not have. OK, the ability to approximate is very usefull, but I think a direct attempt at that would work better than the indirect.
Because they made it easy to write shoddy code. If you make people go through hoops to get the good stuff, then they get lazy and accept the minimum. To use a real world analogy, no, you don't need to have the same key start the car as open your front door, your mail box, and your office. If you insist on selling a car, house lock, mailbox and the office, then don't also make them use the same key for 'convience'.
And if the Add on's were given far more permission than they actually need? If the browser works right, then the damage a poorly written add on can do should be minimal.
If I were those astronauts, I'd be hoping the spider bites me.
The instances where the fee barely covers the cost of collecting are always in less urbanized areas. In major cities, like New York and London, the fees cover most of the cost of transportation. In fact one of the things NYC's MTA is always complaining about is that the State and Federal government give huge amounts to subsidize suburban and rural public transportation and give practically nothign to the city
he he he he he he.
Makes as much sense as Toyota's silly idea
The problem is, they don't have "a hole", they have swiss cheese. The reason they have swiss cheese is that the people responsible for securing their machines take 3 days to do something that should be done in ten minutes.
Most recently, a man fooling around with a home chemistry set discovered that gold flakes of a certain size heat up in the presence of low energy microwaves. Yes all metals do this, but the gold particles heated up at such a low energy that you could swallow the gold and get your body exposed to microwaves that do no significant damage except to the parts of your body that are touching the gold. As it was already known that tumors tend to accumulate heavy metals, it created a cancer treatment.
The original discovery was done within the last 10 years, no 20, and was done at someone's home, not in a lab.
I did my number on the total value of what they offered. I.E. Assuming everyone got an equal mixture of cash and stock. If you were stupid enough to ask for Microsoft stock alone (and got it), then you would have gotten LESS than the current value of the Yahoo stock. If you were smart enough to ask for pure cash (and got it), then you would have gotten the full $30+ value.) Of course, neither of those situations were likely to happen.
Not as bad as you made it look. The MS offer involved MS stock, and if people had taken it, they would now have about $20. Still not the best decision Yahoo ever made.
1. By "Candidates pay no attention to the rest of the country. " I mean pander to those that will give them the most votes as opposed to simply their friends. Without voting, kings and would be dictators pandered to generals with soldiers, not to unarmed civilians. Much better this way. At least SOMEONE that is not their friend gets something. 2. Again, you miss the point. It is better to choose between a turd and a douche that to have a turd and a douche convince idiots to pick up guns and shoot at each other. The idea is to prevent civil war not to get someone better than a turd or a douche. 3. Not true. The worst despot of the 20th century is almost certainly Kim Jong-il. He is the son of the last North Korean leader, in other words, not democratically elected. From wikipedia "According to accepted estimates, North Korea spends $5 billion out of a gross domestic product (GDP) of $20.9 billion on the military, compared with South Korea's $24 billion out of a GDP of $1.196 trillion." Those figures pretty much tell the entire story, but the massive deaths of the 1990's famine (estimated 10% of the population died) tell the rest. He killed a higher percentage of his own people than Hitler or Stalin. Even China's great famine killed a smaller percentage of their population (but a greater number of people). This man is of BELOW average intelligence.
Uh, duh, have you HEARD of the Civil War? And have you heard of militia? No, you don't have to swear to support the US Constitution if you join an illegal 'citizens militia' It is EXACTLY the purpose of voting.
No, you can definitely put a lot more checks into a computer based system, if done properly. Why, because you can keep track of a lot more things. With a paper bases system you pretty much can only do one check: Total votes in the box versus the # of votes for each issue. With a computer based system, you can track a ton of things, including: Total votes per machine (versus total for each candidate per machine and versus total for the polling place) Total votes per hour (versus total for the day as well totals per each hour per candidate) Total votes for major candidates vs. total votes for minor candidates, as broken down by machine and hour. Also, you do burst transmissions of total votes every hour, instead of simply uploading them once at the end of the day. And don't forget, paper receipt verification, where the holder of the paper can look online and see which way their vote was counted, but no one else knows who they voted for. Why do these things? Each one makes it harder to commit fraud. The by machine break down means they have to screw with all the machines at a polling place equally. Four machines means four times they have to screw with it = four times they could get caught. Total votes per hour means you can detect things like a sudden influx of votes all at x time. Total votes for major candidates vs for minor candidates means you have to screw with ALL the votes, not just the one you are mainly interested. Burst transmissions every hour means you can't just screw with the votes at the end of the day, you have to do it continuously, which makes it harder to detect. Electronic machines, if done properly, is a lot more secure because it allows for a ton more safeguards.
This is slashdot. You will have to be a lot more paranoid to get labeled as such now.
What voting does is:
1. Ensure that a candidate pays some attention to the rest of the country.
2. Convince the majority of the armed forces of the country that their is an EASIER, CHEAPER, less DANGEROUS way to remove the current political leader than starting a revolution. (No, it won't work if the country is spit geographically and the minority knows it will never convince the majority of their point of view, but it will work for 90% of the problems like say a moronic Republican government that destroys the economy, the environment, the international ties, etc.)
3. Ensure that the candidate is not below average intelligence. (Yes, GWB is not below average. Not above average, but not below either).
As such, democracy works REALLY well. In the past 200 years each and every candidate has at least tried to figure out what the voting population wants, none have been below average intelligence, and we have had only a single civil war (despite a corrupt "I am not a crook" president and a two attempts to impeach).
Money. Basically, they are cheap SOB's who have sworn to "help the GOP get elected". Not kidding. Diebold is a big supporter of the GOP.
Many forms (not all) of ethanol create more pollution than they save. The best form is that used in Brazil which is created from agricultural waste, not the US type where they grow corn just to make ethanol. As for solar, you are using outdated, false information that counts things twice. I.E. they did things like say "x amount of pollution for creating the chip and y for creating the silicon in the chip when x included y. Solar Panels, if used for their entire estimated lifespan make air pollution better. And most, if treated properly will last far beyond their estimated lifespan.