Definitely! But some customers believed they were getting a genuine speedup from the quantum effects and it being a true quantum computer. I think it's relevant to *them* whether they could accomplish the same thing with (classical) commodity hardware and a grad student to implement the (classical) algorithm, which seems to be the case.
Yep, that's criticism of libertarian in a nutshell.
- Point out how poorly government does X.
- Lectures everyone how X wouldn't solve problem Y because X is so shitty.
We could have better courts, but we would have to admit government's incompetence. Outsource the whole thing to private arbitrators, make litigants bear the cost, and only have government involved in establishing the validity of these rulings. *Then* what's the problem?
Btw, I've never heard someone so proud of their own profession's inefficiency.
Just because you understand currency better, doesn't make up for how you're criticizing a new currency based on a misunderstanding of it.
Mises is dead btw.
The fact that bitcoiners see the hyperinflation of their currency as a GOOD thing in the face of all common economic theory saying otherwise is worrying.
Ethical: put you in undischargeable debt equal to twice your future year yearly income as a precondition to being taught and having the university vouch for your completion.
Not ethical: Require you to take a survey in order to get a certificate of completion in a free, unaccredited course.
He relates it to Valiant's PAC-learning model, which says that the more complexity your model allows (higher VC dimension), the lower the probability that any theory you match to the observe data will correctly generalize, hence why less complex theories tend to be more correct when going outside the sample data.
True. At the same time, though, I remember that for a while my favorite site was donotreply.com, where the owner would post emails he got as a result of organizations listing email addresses in the @donotreply.com domain. Apparently, even major security firms made it easy to accidentally reply confidential information to whoever happened to own donotreply.com.
Aren't radio-wave-emitting devices pretty tightly regulated and controlled, considering the chaos you could cause by being able to broadcast at arbitrary frequencies despite not being recognized as having rights to that part of the spectrum?
Wait, so you're saying that if I slack off when working from home, it's not "abusing the system", so long as managers aren't checking up on me? That "it's their fault for not catching me"?
Slashdot Mirror
Do you realize that analogous punishments for copyright infringement have not actually lowered the number of incidents at all?
Because enforcement is so tepid and inconsistent. If you download a movie illegally, do you expect someone to come looking for you?
Definitely! But some customers believed they were getting a genuine speedup from the quantum effects and it being a true quantum computer. I think it's relevant to *them* whether they could accomplish the same thing with (classical) commodity hardware and a grad student to implement the (classical) algorithm, which seems to be the case.
I seriously doubt that it's it.
a) Law schools get away with a lot worse in terms of stating graduate placements and salaries and charge a LOT more and take a much bigger commitment.
b) They're not going to law off the moment these schools drop specific guarantees of placement
Yep, that's criticism of libertarian in a nutshell.
- Point out how poorly government does X.
- Lectures everyone how X wouldn't solve problem Y because X is so shitty.
We could have better courts, but we would have to admit government's incompetence. Outsource the whole thing to private arbitrators, make litigants bear the cost, and only have government involved in establishing the validity of these rulings. *Then* what's the problem?
Btw, I've never heard someone so proud of their own profession's inefficiency.
Exactly. The moment they shut down the silk road site, the entire Bitcoin money supply plus five bucks will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
The first human, named "human"? Son of a gun!
I applaud them for trying. I also applaud them louder for realizing it didn't work and ending it.
Er, we're not quite there yet! "Don't count your chickens before they're hatched."
Koreanvented.
Exactly. It's perfectly acceptable and scientific to posit differences, as long as you can find the goods and bads to all cancel out somehow.
Anything else can be dismissed without further thought, of course.
Just because you understand currency better, doesn't make up for how you're criticizing a new currency based on a misunderstanding of it.
Mises is dead btw.
The fact that bitcoiners see the hyperinflation of their currency as a GOOD thing in the face of all common economic theory saying otherwise is worrying.
You mean hyper-DEflation?
The bit about being destroyed in cross-examination doesn't seem troubling -- it's standard lawyer advice.
Exactly. Tax software is not somehow an exception to "garbage in/garbage out". It will only discover what you tell it about.
Ethical: put you in undischargeable debt equal to twice your future year yearly income as a precondition to being taught and having the university vouch for your completion.
Not ethical: Require you to take a survey in order to get a certificate of completion in a free, unaccredited course.
???
"He relates it to ... which says ... ".
Scott Aaronson (of quantum computing fame) wrote a great paper on the implications of computational complexity theory for for philosophy, and he addresses a related issue, about "why should science work at all", specifically Occam's Razor.
He relates it to Valiant's PAC-learning model, which says that the more complexity your model allows (higher VC dimension), the lower the probability that any theory you match to the observe data will correctly generalize, hence why less complex theories tend to be more correct when going outside the sample data.
I wonder if my landlord and the electric company will take Ãoeretroactiveà payments? I suspect not.
Two words: credit.
Actually, three more: fix your keyboard.
It *was wanted* by the people casting the actual *votes*. You can't run democracy to work on telepathy!
And, to the extent that Prohibition violated people's constitutional rights, they actually (as is atypical) had the constitution changed.
Not what I'd call "terrorism".
It *is* sadly familiar to hear someone call a group "terrorist" for using the democratic process to pass their agenda.
You can mutate them within the scope of that function, though.
If you're trying to mutate them *outside* the scope of that function, you need to go to a programmer re-education camp.
Solution:
1) Make it a named function.
2) Place the name where you'd otherwise put the lambda.
It works, although you have to deal with the horror of a reusable function defined a few lines up.
True. At the same time, though, I remember that for a while my favorite site was donotreply.com, where the owner would post emails he got as a result of organizations listing email addresses in the @donotreply.com domain. Apparently, even major security firms made it easy to accidentally reply confidential information to whoever happened to own donotreply.com.
Perfect example: Economist and professional snob Tyler Cowen: 'I'd heard about this for years, from "nuts," and always assumed it was true,'
Bullshit. How come there's no record of him giving any credence to such claims before then?
Same thing when Climategate broke out.
Aren't radio-wave-emitting devices pretty tightly regulated and controlled, considering the chaos you could cause by being able to broadcast at arbitrary frequencies despite not being recognized as having rights to that part of the spectrum?
So the new pope is like Sarah Palin would have been if she became president?
Wait, so you're saying that if I slack off when working from home, it's not "abusing the system", so long as managers aren't checking up on me? That "it's their fault for not catching me"?