Yeah, it says something like that in the study. "Participants who consumed a relatively low percentage of total energy from carbohydrates (ie, participants in the lowest quantiles) were more likely to be young, male, a self-reported race other than black, college graduates, have high body-mass index, exercise less during leisure time, have high household income, smoke cigarettes, and have diabetes."
LOL
But it's still misleading of course, because most people won't bother to actually read it.
For ads targeting "Location - Living in: United States", and specifically marked as "US Politics"
Can't they just not do that? I seem to recall Zuckerberg was asked about it in the hearing.
They shouldn't accept dollars for political ads in Russia either. But I guess they like money.
Think about the early web. You had to know how to do it all. There were no frameworks, so every time you developed a website, you were developing a custom framework, basically. Actually I personally was full-stack at my previous job because I was working on a legacy product. A few months before I quit they discontinued the legacy product, and moved me to a UI-only position. It just doesn't make sense to have full-stack developers anymore when everything is so modular, unless you're really just lacking manpower.
You know its a terrible idea, but all your friends are doing it, because they don't understand how it works. And then your mom starts doing it, and then she lays a huge guilt trip on you because you never visit.
But you can still right click on the picture in the search results and select "open image in new tab", and it loads the original picture from the remote host. Heh.
They'll be better actors than humans too. Every scene will be focus group tested. "Oops they aren't rating that character's emotional state as highly as expected. Make the sobbing 10% more intense."
Never met one who thought it was a great idea. Computers are tools we use to manipulate data. That's the last thing you want to able to do easily when you're talking about votes. Anyone who really understands what a computer is should understand it's the wrong tool for the job.
Censorship is a must, I'm afraid. Anyone who has experimented with creating a ugc website has discovered this. If you don't censor at all, your site gets taken over by child porn. If you censor only child porn, it gets taken over by mostly legal porn. If you censor all porn, it gets taken over by spammers. If you censor porn and spammers, it gets taken over by nazis.
I've noticed that a large portion of street litter seems to be energy drink containers. When I left an old sofa out for the garbage man to pick up, some people came by in the middle of the night and threw the cushions all over the alley and left a bunch of energy drink cans lying around. I have a hunch this is all related. Can't quite explain why. Maybe people who like that stuff are constantly looking for stimulation, and littering provides that because it's a little bit naughty.
I don't see why knowing the "len" function is so important. Does remembering it off the top of your head allow you to do something that looking it up doesn't? Some people just don't fill their heads with useless trivia.
An assumption of one universe might happen to match the human limitations of observing universes, but it also arbitrarily assumes there's some condition that limits the number of universes. Since we have never discovered such a condition, shouldn't someone using empirical evidence as their standard therefore assume that there is no limit?
Not a lawyer, but I believe a court would consider that "self defense". The principle is sometimes extended to include defending others. Although I'm sure it would be very unusual to have a situation where self defense required killing an innocent. Pretty sure it would apply to torturing the terrorist though. IMO that's why legalizing torture isn't necessary. There's already implicit exceptions to the law that apply in various "Jack Bauer" scenarios. There's also something the courts call "criminal intent". You can't accidentally commit a crime. Don't believe you can be coerced into committing a crime either.
Now we're not just sexist pigs, but we are also in an unstable industry and women will avoid us like the plague.
Actually I don't find this stuff as insulting as the "anyone can code" meme. Maybe we should all wear suits so that people take us seriously, like lawyers. Actually, that might be the real reason women don't get involved. Their parents don't take the profession seriously, so they steer their smart daughters away from it.
There's only costs involved if you assume there's a still a free market economy. If the free market is replaced by government managed robots providing for everyone's needs, then there's truly zero costs. Robots would collect all resources from publicly owned land, and provide all goods and resources. Why is any exchange of money required? Obviously, I'm assuming the robots would be amazingly capable, but that's the scenario we're discussing here. One where robots have taken over all human labor.
The whole point (ultimately) of robots is that they do things for free. I mean totally free (ultimately). If they can collect energy, dig raw materials out of the ground, and build things themselves, then there's no costs involved.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. Get ready for "no collusion" texts 30 times a day.
...blah blah blah...
Yeah, it says something like that in the study. "Participants who consumed a relatively low percentage of total energy from carbohydrates (ie, participants in the lowest quantiles) were more likely to be young, male, a self-reported race other than black, college graduates, have high body-mass index, exercise less during leisure time, have high household income, smoke cigarettes, and have diabetes." LOL But it's still misleading of course, because most people won't bother to actually read it.
The Space Force can use it to grease the treads on their space tanks. Pretty cool!
For ads targeting "Location - Living in: United States", and specifically marked as "US Politics" Can't they just not do that? I seem to recall Zuckerberg was asked about it in the hearing. They shouldn't accept dollars for political ads in Russia either. But I guess they like money.
...call your ISP "Heyyyy, this website is slow, can you tell me if you're throttling it?..."
Think about the early web. You had to know how to do it all. There were no frameworks, so every time you developed a website, you were developing a custom framework, basically. Actually I personally was full-stack at my previous job because I was working on a legacy product. A few months before I quit they discontinued the legacy product, and moved me to a UI-only position. It just doesn't make sense to have full-stack developers anymore when everything is so modular, unless you're really just lacking manpower.
You know its a terrible idea, but all your friends are doing it, because they don't understand how it works. And then your mom starts doing it, and then she lays a huge guilt trip on you because you never visit.
My intuition is this is some corollary of Dunning-Kruger.
But you can still right click on the picture in the search results and select "open image in new tab", and it loads the original picture from the remote host. Heh.
They'll be better actors than humans too. Every scene will be focus group tested. "Oops they aren't rating that character's emotional state as highly as expected. Make the sobbing 10% more intense."
Never met one who thought it was a great idea. Computers are tools we use to manipulate data. That's the last thing you want to able to do easily when you're talking about votes. Anyone who really understands what a computer is should understand it's the wrong tool for the job.
Censorship is a must, I'm afraid. Anyone who has experimented with creating a ugc website has discovered this. If you don't censor at all, your site gets taken over by child porn. If you censor only child porn, it gets taken over by mostly legal porn. If you censor all porn, it gets taken over by spammers. If you censor porn and spammers, it gets taken over by nazis.
Why can't the computer just use a real quantum-hall effect internally to produce the simulated quantum-hall effect?
The Russian mafia will just steal your identity and collect your class action winnings.
I've noticed that a large portion of street litter seems to be energy drink containers. When I left an old sofa out for the garbage man to pick up, some people came by in the middle of the night and threw the cushions all over the alley and left a bunch of energy drink cans lying around. I have a hunch this is all related. Can't quite explain why. Maybe people who like that stuff are constantly looking for stimulation, and littering provides that because it's a little bit naughty.
I don't see why knowing the "len" function is so important. Does remembering it off the top of your head allow you to do something that looking it up doesn't? Some people just don't fill their heads with useless trivia.
An assumption of one universe might happen to match the human limitations of observing universes, but it also arbitrarily assumes there's some condition that limits the number of universes. Since we have never discovered such a condition, shouldn't someone using empirical evidence as their standard therefore assume that there is no limit?
Software engineer, train engineer, political engineer, clickbait engineer (ahem)
Not a lawyer, but I believe a court would consider that "self defense". The principle is sometimes extended to include defending others. Although I'm sure it would be very unusual to have a situation where self defense required killing an innocent. Pretty sure it would apply to torturing the terrorist though. IMO that's why legalizing torture isn't necessary. There's already implicit exceptions to the law that apply in various "Jack Bauer" scenarios. There's also something the courts call "criminal intent". You can't accidentally commit a crime. Don't believe you can be coerced into committing a crime either.
Now we're not just sexist pigs, but we are also in an unstable industry and women will avoid us like the plague. Actually I don't find this stuff as insulting as the "anyone can code" meme. Maybe we should all wear suits so that people take us seriously, like lawyers. Actually, that might be the real reason women don't get involved. Their parents don't take the profession seriously, so they steer their smart daughters away from it.
I bet if you hadn't been doing any downloading, you would have gotten a false positive on the lie detector and they would have refused to hire you.
...of news for nerds.
There's only costs involved if you assume there's a still a free market economy. If the free market is replaced by government managed robots providing for everyone's needs, then there's truly zero costs. Robots would collect all resources from publicly owned land, and provide all goods and resources. Why is any exchange of money required? Obviously, I'm assuming the robots would be amazingly capable, but that's the scenario we're discussing here. One where robots have taken over all human labor.
The whole point (ultimately) of robots is that they do things for free. I mean totally free (ultimately). If they can collect energy, dig raw materials out of the ground, and build things themselves, then there's no costs involved.