Is this proven? Or is it one of those things that are assumed to be true (with good reason). I thought all of the time complexity classes are still essentially open questions.
We are better off with poor immigrants who come in and start businesses than poor guest workers who are barely more than slaves working on plantations.
You're right, but you assume they have only good effects. They do not, they have negative effects as well.
True. It's perhaps easier to quantify the negative effects because they are measured in dollars. Diversity isn't really measurable in dollars so it takes some value function to compare the two, and that value function is different for everybody.
Just because laws do not stop 100% of discrimination from going on doesn't mean that they don't do anything. If it stops 25% of discrimination, it's still doing a lot, and the effects are somewhat cumulative because people are going to become accustomed to seeing more diversity, and companies are having to make greater efforts at compliance to avoid appearing discriminatory. It's hard to prove that laws were a cause, but workplaces are a lot more diverse now than they were in the past. It used to be that flight attendants were just single young ladies, but I see a fair number of men now, and people of various ages.
You know, when people make these arguments ad human nature, I'm pretty sure they are talking about themselves. It's human nature to cheat and steal--I read as--I cheat and steal. It's human nature to only hire white people == I only hire white people. Human nature isn't some unchanging universal thing. Human nature in 1915 was quite a bit more bigoted than human nature in 2015. Laws certainly aren't responsible for the entire shift, or even the majority of the shift, but I do believe they played some part.
You talk about civil liabilities and brand damage to the car company, but actually what that means is that people will die, and the company will calculate how much brand damage is acceptable.
I wonder how many accidents the Google cars witnessed but did not participate in. That data could be very useful in determining fault, if it could be subpoenaed or somehow made available.
When reaction speeds and computation starts to exceed humans' by orders of magnitude, many things become possible. Letting go of the brakes, then hitting the brakes again after getting struck to avoid damage to the front car. Taking into account the reactions of other drivers (heuristically) is possible.
You aren't the target audience for the scientific article. That's what the press release is for. Abstracts are not the same as introductions. They are necessarily succinct, to the point where use of jargon is required.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, I know how to math. 1024^80 is still much larger than the age of the universe in Planck times.
I could use $20. Hey, it's not stolen if I sell it myself, right?
I'd say cryptography is still secure if the time complexity is something like n^80.
Is this proven? Or is it one of those things that are assumed to be true (with good reason). I thought all of the time complexity classes are still essentially open questions.
Hasn't China become more free?
I was referring to H-2A, rather than H-1B.
We are better off with poor immigrants who come in and start businesses than poor guest workers who are barely more than slaves working on plantations.
Yeast. It is sold as nutritional yeast as yellow powdery flakes.
What is a real individual thing? In the end, if we can model it and we can measure it, it's about as real as anything in our world can be.
You're right, but you assume they have only good effects. They do not, they have negative effects as well.
True. It's perhaps easier to quantify the negative effects because they are measured in dollars. Diversity isn't really measurable in dollars so it takes some value function to compare the two, and that value function is different for everybody.
obligatory: http://www.penny-arcade.com/co...
Because it's elementary math?
Just because laws do not stop 100% of discrimination from going on doesn't mean that they don't do anything. If it stops 25% of discrimination, it's still doing a lot, and the effects are somewhat cumulative because people are going to become accustomed to seeing more diversity, and companies are having to make greater efforts at compliance to avoid appearing discriminatory. It's hard to prove that laws were a cause, but workplaces are a lot more diverse now than they were in the past. It used to be that flight attendants were just single young ladies, but I see a fair number of men now, and people of various ages.
You know, when people make these arguments ad human nature, I'm pretty sure they are talking about themselves. It's human nature to cheat and steal--I read as--I cheat and steal. It's human nature to only hire white people == I only hire white people. Human nature isn't some unchanging universal thing. Human nature in 1915 was quite a bit more bigoted than human nature in 2015. Laws certainly aren't responsible for the entire shift, or even the majority of the shift, but I do believe they played some part.
You talk about civil liabilities and brand damage to the car company, but actually what that means is that people will die, and the company will calculate how much brand damage is acceptable.
Imagine the face on the poor guy whose computer got owned when ze looks at their internet bill.
The story submitter and/or editors clearly had some agenda here in using a misleadingly suggestive title.
You are assuming a person is a troll or not a troll.
I wonder how many accidents the Google cars witnessed but did not participate in. That data could be very useful in determining fault, if it could be subpoenaed or somehow made available.
I assume that numbers are much higher for people living in the city.
When reaction speeds and computation starts to exceed humans' by orders of magnitude, many things become possible. Letting go of the brakes, then hitting the brakes again after getting struck to avoid damage to the front car. Taking into account the reactions of other drivers (heuristically) is possible.
Wow, that sounds awesome! Is there more info on this somewhere?
Ye of so little faith! Computers will be better than us at this sort of thing soon, if not already.
What makes you think the queen bee is "ruling"? She's just there to make babies.
Whether cash or credit, it's all controlled by a cartel of banks.
You aren't the target audience for the scientific article. That's what the press release is for. Abstracts are not the same as introductions. They are necessarily succinct, to the point where use of jargon is required.