Usually the only number investors care about is EBITDA, which is earnings before taxes, adjustments, amortizations, etc... It's, basically, how much the company made minus operating expenses, because all the other stuff can be used to fudge the numbers.
Are we okay with filtering people based on those preferences though?
I'm not inclined to impose my values on what what criteria people use when they are choosing whom to date. I think it should be up to the individual. There are already dating sites that cater to certain overall preferences (jdate/christian date/muslima/grindr/etc...) If you care about that kind of thing then great. If not, go to a dating site that doesn't. I'm sure they are out there.
As for unintended bias in algorithms, I'm sure it could happen, but again, I think it's a bug that most dating sites would want to fix.
How about a dating site that decided you had a bias in favour of tall partners, or light skinned partners?
If their algorithm has decided this and it doesn't reflect your actual preference, then it's a flaw in their algorithm. I'm pretty sure there is incentive for them to fix it, if that provides better results.
I think, if the algorithm is reflecting what people actually want, then there is no problem. I think people are conflating machine learning with "programmed-in" biases.
Bias is favoring one thing over another. Which is what you want certain algorithms to do. I want Youtube to find stuff I like. I want Google to find pages that are relevant to me.
Not sure how you are going to tease out the "good" bias from the "bad" bias, though. To extend your example, if 90% of the people in Hong Kong looking for a famous concert pianist are trying to find Lang Lang, who is hugely popular there, he's going to come up pretty fast when looking for concert pianists in general, which is what you want. It means the algorithm is being biased against Helene Grimaud, which is fine, because she isn't what most people are looking for in Hong Kong. That doesn't mean she doesn't come up at all, it just means she's ranked lower in the search results.
"If you go to where there's a bunch of ice cream and then you don't come back, you haven't actually gotten ice cream, you've just gone where ice cream is.."
I guess watching TV that isn't turned on is still watching TV, then.
I remember the community bulletin board channel on my local cable provider ran on an Amiga. Every few months you could see what a Workbench desktop looked like by flipping to that channel over the weekend after the system had crashed and rebooted. It's output wasn't even that great. Looked like a VIC-20 outputting big blocky text-mode text and graphics.
I assume they then blacklist the serial number of the stolen camera rendering it useless. This is what all electronics companies should do. Make it absolutely clear that any stolen device with a serial number that needs to talk to home base to operate becomes useless once stolen.
Ideally, if you try to configure a stolen device, a big flag comes up on the phone/tablet/computer you're using to do the setup informing you the thing you are setting up has been stolen and is a useless piece of junk. Even better, QR code on every device you can scan with their app and see if it's been recorded stolen or not.
"Blocking *lawful* internet content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices unless such blocking is conducted in a manner consistent with reasonable network management practices" "Regulating network traffic by throttling bandwidth or otherwise impairing or degrading *lawful* internet traffic on the basis of internet content"
Emphasis mine. How are they going to tell what constitutes lawful or unlawful content? I guess they'll just have to snoop on everything you do, log it and report back to the authorities. It gives ISPs implicit authority to track, literally, everything you do. It may be interpreted as a requirement.
How about this: No payment for preferential treatment of bandwidth. Period.
1990s - Will terminal services bring the end of the desktop? 2000s - Will the internet bring the end of the desktop? 2010s - Will tablets bring the end of the desktop?
Funny thing is, J2ME was pretty big business pre-iOS and Android. Probably had the largest market share of any mobile platform, at least up there with native Symbian apps. Oracle did basically nothing with it, as they bought Sun primarily for enterprise Java and server hardware. Then, when Android blew up, Oracle finally realized they could make some money off of a mobile Java platform, but it was too late. They had done nothing with J2ME and it was so far behind anything else as a platform the only way they could monetize was to sue.
Perhaps I've missed it (and it's a good chance I have as I don't follow him) but I don't recall seeing where he's spoken out about the illegal activities being done in his name (hacking, encrypting, murder, etc)
You've only scratched the surface. Armed robbery, kidnapping, counterfeiting, extortion, racketeering, stock manipulation, global financial manipulation, tanking currencies, falsifying documents, purposefully accelerating global climate change, drug dealing, redlining, gaslighting, forming destructive cults, cheating on tax returns, election manipulation, writing fraudulent yelp reviews, providing sub-prime mortgages, tearing off mattress tags, driving 1MPH over the speed limit, griefing, trolling, spawnkilling, defacing library books, writing in pen when the instructions say to use pencil...
The crimes ne'er-do-wells commit in the name of PewDiePie are extensive and astonishing.
Motorola's new 16-bit microcontroller has a whopping 16K of RAM, and 8 GPIO! You can use it to build robots, or home automation systems, or low-end general purpose computers...
Today:
Our new quad-core CPU, 128-core GPU is great if you want to build a speaker!
Pretty sure they want to be able to do this without getting a warrant. I'm also pretty sure they are going to finagle it so they just download *all* texts, dump them into a database, then sort through them looking for any criminal activity later on.
Though Pitney Bowes is far from a household name, the $3.4 billion data broker is "a huge company at this point," says Stephens, with enough influence to inadvertently rename a neighborhood across hundreds of sites...
The writer's, and possibly editor's if there is one, age is showing. In the 90's and early 2000's Pitney Bowes would advertise their home postal meters *heavily* on TV. If you're over a certain age, you've certainly at least *heard* of Pitney Bowes. Even more likely if you work in any kind of office environment, where you would probably have a Pitney Bowes postage printer somewhere. My office had one up until a few years ago, when they completely outsourced mail ads.
I don't think anyone would think of them as a big data company, but it makes perfect sense that they have a giant database of map data.
Is one of the largest issues with the economy today. I'm spitballing a bit, but I'd say half of the regulations are great and keep people safe and business operating properly. Half are protectionist, nonsensical, outdated or so broad or vague nobody knows how to follow them.
Since when is going to Caribbean countries "crap"? It seems like a fun (and relatively inexpensive, depending on country) trip.
Because, when flying from the southeast US, most of the Caribbean is *just* short enough to be considered a "day trip" so you don't get to stay overnight. You fly there, deplane, load up, then fly back. Also, you are mostly flying over water, which is boring. The quality of the airports is pretty variable, as well. Anywhere from a typical modern airport to the aforementioned landing strip. For the more "rustic" airports, the pilots tend to have to do more mechanical work as the ground crews can be unreliable or nonexistent. This means crawling around the plane checking everything in the Caribbean heat.
A "good" route would be flying from Chicago to Dallas, hang out in the nice pilot's lounge for an hour, do a quick check of the plane, fly back to Chicago, hang out in the lounge... repeat...
My cousin's husband has been an airline pilot for about four years. Pilots with less experience usually get the "crappier" routes. So he has to fly down to the Caribbean pretty regularly. According to him, it's pretty good training, as you are sometimes landing on airstrips where air traffic control consists of one guy on a raised platform with binoculars and a radio. It's usually all manual when taking off and landing down there. He lives in the south-east, so it's probably common for his area.
I'm guessing North Korea doesn't keep tabs on exactly who doesn't care about UN treaties. Rebel and guerilla groups, terrorist organizations, shady governments - there are all kinds of potential customers for their weapons. I don't think they particularly care to whom they sell.
It doesn't matter. Competition in this sense is what is best for capitalism to work.
OK, then you are looking for substitute goods. If a consumer wants to use Spotify, is there a replacement platform for iOS that lets you do that? Yes. Is Apple preventing anyone from using a replacement platform? No. Then everything's OK.
Again, I can walk into Best Buy and buy dozens of devices that can run Spotify that have nothing to do with Apple. That's competition. How many of those devices also run Apple Music? Two or three? I'm failing to see the issue where Spotify is disadvantaged one ONE of those platforms. Granted, it's a popular platform, but it isn't even the MOST popular.
In order for capitalism to function, competition must be encouraged not stifled. Limiting the markets that an app can participate in is stifling that app's ability to compete.
Sure, but you are mis-defining competition. There are plenty of ways to use Spotify that don't involve Apple. You can even use Spotify on iOS using Safari and completely bypass Apple's app store. Otherwise there's Sonos, Alexa, Android, any device with a web browser, most blu-ray players, most receivers, smart TVs, any Roku-like device...
You could argue that Apple is stifling competition on Apple's platform, but they aren't preventing anyone from doing anything off of their platform, and that's where anti-monopoly rules would kick in.
What ever happened to the concept of restricting businesses due to unfair competition? At one time TV networks could not sell products. Surely it works the same for the owner of the whole marketplace?
Those laws only kick in if the behavior is harming the consumer directly. Can a consumer easily get Spotify on other devices? Yes? Then there's no problem.
The converse to your idea would be any fly-by-night smart device manufacturer should be able to *force* Spotify to develop an app for their platform. Otherwise it's unfair, right?
Lets say that I follow a person named John D. around for days without permission, make note of what John D. does and where he buys with timestamps accurate to the second without John D. knowing it is happening
No, a more apt description would be that John D spends all of his free time at the same Target. He buys all of his stuff there using a Target credit card. He talks to the employees constantly. He hangs out with his friends at the attached Starbucks and has loud conversations with them. He eats at the attached Subway every day. He uses the Target pharmacy for all of his prescriptions.
Then, he finds out that the employees of that Target know all of this stuff about him and is appalled.
"Pretty good" - compared to what? It was clearly the worst of the commonly-used audio formats in terms of fideltity,.iIt was at best acceptable, but was also the only practical method for car audio before the CD came along, and, and you could make mix tapes with it.
So you didn't watch the Techmoan video. Answers are in there. Hence the tl;dr thing at the beginning of the sentence.
Slashdot Mirror
Usually the only number investors care about is EBITDA, which is earnings before taxes, adjustments, amortizations, etc... It's, basically, how much the company made minus operating expenses, because all the other stuff can be used to fudge the numbers.
Are we okay with filtering people based on those preferences though?
I'm not inclined to impose my values on what what criteria people use when they are choosing whom to date. I think it should be up to the individual. There are already dating sites that cater to certain overall preferences (jdate/christian date/muslima/grindr/etc...) If you care about that kind of thing then great. If not, go to a dating site that doesn't. I'm sure they are out there.
As for unintended bias in algorithms, I'm sure it could happen, but again, I think it's a bug that most dating sites would want to fix.
How about a dating site that decided you had a bias in favour of tall partners, or light skinned partners?
If their algorithm has decided this and it doesn't reflect your actual preference, then it's a flaw in their algorithm. I'm pretty sure there is incentive for them to fix it, if that provides better results.
I think, if the algorithm is reflecting what people actually want, then there is no problem. I think people are conflating machine learning with "programmed-in" biases.
Bias is favoring one thing over another. Which is what you want certain algorithms to do. I want Youtube to find stuff I like. I want Google to find pages that are relevant to me.
Not sure how you are going to tease out the "good" bias from the "bad" bias, though. To extend your example, if 90% of the people in Hong Kong looking for a famous concert pianist are trying to find Lang Lang, who is hugely popular there, he's going to come up pretty fast when looking for concert pianists in general, which is what you want. It means the algorithm is being biased against Helene Grimaud, which is fine, because she isn't what most people are looking for in Hong Kong. That doesn't mean she doesn't come up at all, it just means she's ranked lower in the search results.
"If you go to where there's a bunch of ice cream and then you don't come back, you haven't actually gotten ice cream, you've just gone where ice cream is.."
I guess watching TV that isn't turned on is still watching TV, then.
I remember the community bulletin board channel on my local cable provider ran on an Amiga. Every few months you could see what a Workbench desktop looked like by flipping to that channel over the weekend after the system had crashed and rebooted. It's output wasn't even that great. Looked like a VIC-20 outputting big blocky text-mode text and graphics.
I assume they then blacklist the serial number of the stolen camera rendering it useless. This is what all electronics companies should do. Make it absolutely clear that any stolen device with a serial number that needs to talk to home base to operate becomes useless once stolen.
Ideally, if you try to configure a stolen device, a big flag comes up on the phone/tablet/computer you're using to do the setup informing you the thing you are setting up has been stolen and is a useless piece of junk. Even better, QR code on every device you can scan with their app and see if it's been recorded stolen or not.
"Blocking *lawful* internet content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices unless such blocking is conducted in a manner consistent with reasonable network management practices"
"Regulating network traffic by throttling bandwidth or otherwise impairing or degrading *lawful* internet traffic on the basis of internet content"
Emphasis mine. How are they going to tell what constitutes lawful or unlawful content? I guess they'll just have to snoop on everything you do, log it and report back to the authorities. It gives ISPs implicit authority to track, literally, everything you do. It may be interpreted as a requirement.
How about this: No payment for preferential treatment of bandwidth. Period.
1990s - Will terminal services bring the end of the desktop?
2000s - Will the internet bring the end of the desktop?
2010s - Will tablets bring the end of the desktop?
I'm guessing no.
Funny thing is, J2ME was pretty big business pre-iOS and Android. Probably had the largest market share of any mobile platform, at least up there with native Symbian apps. Oracle did basically nothing with it, as they bought Sun primarily for enterprise Java and server hardware. Then, when Android blew up, Oracle finally realized they could make some money off of a mobile Java platform, but it was too late. They had done nothing with J2ME and it was so far behind anything else as a platform the only way they could monetize was to sue.
Little Bits:
https://littlebits.com/
Gakken EX:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Snap Circuits:
https://www.elenco.com/brand/s...
Then there are the domain specific building block electronics - Arduino shields, raspberry pi blocks, MakerBlocks, mBot modules...
And, of course, all the modules for Mindstorms, both from LEGO and third-party.
These look kind of neat, though. Price is right!
Perhaps I've missed it (and it's a good chance I have as I don't follow him) but I don't recall seeing where he's spoken out about the illegal activities being done in his name (hacking, encrypting, murder, etc)
You've only scratched the surface. Armed robbery, kidnapping, counterfeiting, extortion, racketeering, stock manipulation, global financial manipulation, tanking currencies, falsifying documents, purposefully accelerating global climate change, drug dealing, redlining, gaslighting, forming destructive cults, cheating on tax returns, election manipulation, writing fraudulent yelp reviews, providing sub-prime mortgages, tearing off mattress tags, driving 1MPH over the speed limit, griefing, trolling, spawnkilling, defacing library books, writing in pen when the instructions say to use pencil...
The crimes ne'er-do-wells commit in the name of PewDiePie are extensive and astonishing.
30 Years Ago:
Motorola's new 16-bit microcontroller has a whopping 16K of RAM, and 8 GPIO! You can use it to build robots, or home automation systems, or low-end general purpose computers...
Today:
Our new quad-core CPU, 128-core GPU is great if you want to build a speaker!
Pretty sure they want to be able to do this without getting a warrant. I'm also pretty sure they are going to finagle it so they just download *all* texts, dump them into a database, then sort through them looking for any criminal activity later on.
Though Pitney Bowes is far from a household name, the $3.4 billion data broker is "a huge company at this point," says Stephens, with enough influence to inadvertently rename a neighborhood across hundreds of sites...
The writer's, and possibly editor's if there is one, age is showing. In the 90's and early 2000's Pitney Bowes would advertise their home postal meters *heavily* on TV. If you're over a certain age, you've certainly at least *heard* of Pitney Bowes. Even more likely if you work in any kind of office environment, where you would probably have a Pitney Bowes postage printer somewhere. My office had one up until a few years ago, when they completely outsourced mail ads.
I don't think anyone would think of them as a big data company, but it makes perfect sense that they have a giant database of map data.
Is one of the largest issues with the economy today. I'm spitballing a bit, but I'd say half of the regulations are great and keep people safe and business operating properly. Half are protectionist, nonsensical, outdated or so broad or vague nobody knows how to follow them.
Since when is going to Caribbean countries "crap"? It seems like a fun (and relatively inexpensive, depending on country) trip.
Because, when flying from the southeast US, most of the Caribbean is *just* short enough to be considered a "day trip" so you don't get to stay overnight. You fly there, deplane, load up, then fly back. Also, you are mostly flying over water, which is boring. The quality of the airports is pretty variable, as well. Anywhere from a typical modern airport to the aforementioned landing strip. For the more "rustic" airports, the pilots tend to have to do more mechanical work as the ground crews can be unreliable or nonexistent. This means crawling around the plane checking everything in the Caribbean heat.
A "good" route would be flying from Chicago to Dallas, hang out in the nice pilot's lounge for an hour, do a quick check of the plane, fly back to Chicago, hang out in the lounge... repeat...
My cousin's husband has been an airline pilot for about four years. Pilots with less experience usually get the "crappier" routes. So he has to fly down to the Caribbean pretty regularly. According to him, it's pretty good training, as you are sometimes landing on airstrips where air traffic control consists of one guy on a raised platform with binoculars and a radio. It's usually all manual when taking off and landing down there. He lives in the south-east, so it's probably common for his area.
I'm guessing North Korea doesn't keep tabs on exactly who doesn't care about UN treaties. Rebel and guerilla groups, terrorist organizations, shady governments - there are all kinds of potential customers for their weapons. I don't think they particularly care to whom they sell.
It doesn't matter. Competition in this sense is what is best for capitalism to work.
OK, then you are looking for substitute goods. If a consumer wants to use Spotify, is there a replacement platform for iOS that lets you do that? Yes. Is Apple preventing anyone from using a replacement platform? No. Then everything's OK.
Again, I can walk into Best Buy and buy dozens of devices that can run Spotify that have nothing to do with Apple. That's competition. How many of those devices also run Apple Music? Two or three? I'm failing to see the issue where Spotify is disadvantaged one ONE of those platforms. Granted, it's a popular platform, but it isn't even the MOST popular.
In order for capitalism to function, competition must be encouraged not stifled. Limiting the markets that an app can participate in is stifling that app's ability to compete.
Sure, but you are mis-defining competition. There are plenty of ways to use Spotify that don't involve Apple. You can even use Spotify on iOS using Safari and completely bypass Apple's app store. Otherwise there's Sonos, Alexa, Android, any device with a web browser, most blu-ray players, most receivers, smart TVs, any Roku-like device...
You could argue that Apple is stifling competition on Apple's platform, but they aren't preventing anyone from doing anything off of their platform, and that's where anti-monopoly rules would kick in.
What ever happened to the concept of restricting businesses due to unfair competition? At one time TV networks could not sell products. Surely it works the same for the owner of the whole marketplace?
Those laws only kick in if the behavior is harming the consumer directly. Can a consumer easily get Spotify on other devices? Yes? Then there's no problem.
The converse to your idea would be any fly-by-night smart device manufacturer should be able to *force* Spotify to develop an app for their platform. Otherwise it's unfair, right?
Anyone who didn't sign the UN treaty on the sanctions. Probably Iran, Myanmar, Cuba, etc...
Lets say that I follow a person named John D. around for days without permission, make note of what John D. does and where he buys with timestamps accurate to the second without John D. knowing it is happening
No, a more apt description would be that John D spends all of his free time at the same Target. He buys all of his stuff there using a Target credit card. He talks to the employees constantly. He hangs out with his friends at the attached Starbucks and has loud conversations with them. He eats at the attached Subway every day. He uses the Target pharmacy for all of his prescriptions.
Then, he finds out that the employees of that Target know all of this stuff about him and is appalled.
"Pretty good" - compared to what? It was clearly the worst of the commonly-used audio formats in terms of fideltity, .iIt was at best acceptable, but was also the only practical method for car audio before the CD came along, and, and you could make mix tapes with it.
So you didn't watch the Techmoan video. Answers are in there. Hence the tl;dr thing at the beginning of the sentence.