Sure, teach statistics before Calculus. But the reason students struggle in math is the teachers themselves do not know math. There is an illiteracy in math that is handed down generation to generation, analogous to the language illiteracy in the descendants of American slaves that is handed down generation to generation (stemming from when it was made illegal to teach blacks how to read and write). Math, including Algebra II and Geometry, teach logical thinking, something that is sorely lacking and that is greatly needed in today's culture which is soaked in misleading media on the one hand and marked by rapid changes in technology and culture on the other, both of which requiring critical and logical thinking to sort it out and to not get led astray by fads and lies.
Yes, percentages mask two big factors: generational bias and the basket of goods. With the number of good-paying jobs shrinking due to globalization and automation, the few remaining jobs are going to Boomers and GenX'ers who have experience, shutting out GenY/Millennials and GenZ. At the same time, the basket of goods those younger generations are facing is skewed due to college tuition outpacing average inflation.
Thus the younger generations are facing the double whammy of fewer jobs and a basket more expensive than average. This has led to the term https://www.reddit.com/r/lostgeneration/.
50% rise in eight years? That's only 1.5^0.125 = 5.2%/year. That's less than the rise in college tuition. For the extremes of the range, there is the ridiculously low CPI of 10% over eight years and the ridiculously high ShadowStats.com of 100% over eight years (view page source to see the hidden value). The geometric mean of those two extremes is sqrt(1.1*2.0)=48%.
Maybe 50% over eight years (5.2%/year) is in fact overstating actual inflation, but it's far from self-evident. By just stating the number and expecting people to be shocked, Mark O'Neill is, intentionally or not, advancing the wage-suppression-through-inflation scam.
We further assume that a leak of information from any conspirator is sufficient to expose the conspiracy and render it redundant
So any single person acting alone, of any stature in society, can bust open a conspiracy and get it on CNN?
The problems with this model are many:
1. It ignores authority and credibility of the leaker
2. It ignores the reach of the leaker
3. It does not define when a conspiracy theory has been proven (e.g. a reasonable definition is whether a specified percentage of the population understand the conspiracy to be true)
For example, to use one of the examples of a true conspiracy the author used, the NSA:
The National Security Agency (NSA) PRISM affair—The staggering extent of spying by the NSA and its allies on civilian internet users was exposed by contractor Edward Snowden in 2013.
That's just factually wrong. It was substantially exposed on PBS in 2007. Why am I quoting PBS? Because I know it is perceived as an authoritative source. Why do most people not know about this? Because PBS lacks the reach.
Both authoratativeness and reach are required to expose a conspiracy. And once these two elements are added into the model, then one is forced to accept a non-trivial definition of conspiracy-proven-true by setting a threshold of population who believes (and not simply saying one leaker implies the whole world instantaneously and fully believes).
The Trolley Problem is a red herring that distracts from the real danger: government remote-controlled detainment of political opponents, as depicted in Minority Report. Plus, any number of variations: script-kiddies hacking, drug cartel kidnapping, kidnapping/trafficking of women/children, murder-for-hire (drive off cliff), nation-state espionage and assassination. When major crimes, and not just credit card scams, become available to the push of a button, the risk threshold to the criminal is lowered for heinous crimes.
In addition Beazley point out that the piracy lawsuit was filed November last year, several days before the December 1, 2014 date the insurance policy began.
As any computer systems engineer knows, it's all about compute and storage. This article is about compute. But storage has been vastly improved for all of us. We now store or keep knowledge on the Internet instead of keeping it in our heads. The access time of this storage is very fast, too, compared to paper files and libraries. This access time is also of low variability, as it is in our pockets now.
Only trouble is that in terms of competitive advantage, the Internet is available to all. The best you can do is to learn how to use it slightly more effectively.
But in terms of the Slashdot headline, "You Can't Get Smarter," I disagree -- we've all gotten a lot smarter.
(That's right, I don't agree with those who say the Internet has made us dumber. I think the opposite.)
We already have societies where money isn't used or at least isn't that useful, such as a submarine on a long deployment, which just happens to be the model upon which Star Trek starships was founded.
Outside of starships, the Federation still had to deal in gold-pressed latinum with Quark's establishment. (Whether that was a "site license" or a per-person allowance was never made clear, but we can conclude from the in-story characterizations that Quark wasn't donating out of the goodness of his heart.)
So Star Trek really isn't too far off from today's military environment.
Here is the original MPEG-LA press release. They really did entitle it "call for patents", which is obnoxious because it plays off of "call for papers", which is a call to share technology information, not restrict it. This type of turning a phrase to be the opposite and evil intention of its original reminds me of Braveheart's jus primae noctis.
Headline should be "ROTJ-Style Hoverbikes" not "Star Wars-Style Hoverbikes". This is not supposed to be CNN, with its aberrant Apple backs down from Swift headline this week.
Theory says that the move to cloud should reduce global demand for servers since each individual company won't have to provide for its own compute & storage capacity overhead and can instead rely on both the "elasticity" and the efficient VM packing/balancing of the cloud.
The reality, however, is that the race to the cloud has cloud providers throwing money into cloud infrastructure and charging customers a pittance compared to the capital investment. This has corporate users of the cloud using more capacity than they otherwise would.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, teach statistics before Calculus. But the reason students struggle in math is the teachers themselves do not know math. There is an illiteracy in math that is handed down generation to generation, analogous to the language illiteracy in the descendants of American slaves that is handed down generation to generation (stemming from when it was made illegal to teach blacks how to read and write). Math, including Algebra II and Geometry, teach logical thinking, something that is sorely lacking and that is greatly needed in today's culture which is soaked in misleading media on the one hand and marked by rapid changes in technology and culture on the other, both of which requiring critical and logical thinking to sort it out and to not get led astray by fads and lies.
Yes, percentages mask two big factors: generational bias and the basket of goods. With the number of good-paying jobs shrinking due to globalization and automation, the few remaining jobs are going to Boomers and GenX'ers who have experience, shutting out GenY/Millennials and GenZ. At the same time, the basket of goods those younger generations are facing is skewed due to college tuition outpacing average inflation.
Thus the younger generations are facing the double whammy of fewer jobs and a basket more expensive than average. This has led to the term https://www.reddit.com/r/lostgeneration/.
50% rise in eight years? That's only 1.5^0.125 = 5.2%/year. That's less than the rise in college tuition. For the extremes of the range, there is the ridiculously low CPI of 10% over eight years and the ridiculously high ShadowStats.com of 100% over eight years (view page source to see the hidden value). The geometric mean of those two extremes is sqrt(1.1*2.0)=48%.
Maybe 50% over eight years (5.2%/year) is in fact overstating actual inflation, but it's far from self-evident. By just stating the number and expecting people to be shocked, Mark O'Neill is, intentionally or not, advancing the wage-suppression-through-inflation scam.
Also, I thought the world was going SSD anyway, which is thinner, not thicker?
0.3mm signal path per cycle (assuming 5:1 settling time).
His model is way too weak.
So any single person acting alone, of any stature in society, can bust open a conspiracy and get it on CNN?
The problems with this model are many:
1. It ignores authority and credibility of the leaker
2. It ignores the reach of the leaker
3. It does not define when a conspiracy theory has been proven (e.g. a reasonable definition is whether a specified percentage of the population understand the conspiracy to be true)
For example, to use one of the examples of a true conspiracy the author used, the NSA:
That's just factually wrong. It was substantially exposed on PBS in 2007. Why am I quoting PBS? Because I know it is perceived as an authoritative source. Why do most people not know about this? Because PBS lacks the reach.
Both authoratativeness and reach are required to expose a conspiracy. And once these two elements are added into the model, then one is forced to accept a non-trivial definition of conspiracy-proven-true by setting a threshold of population who believes (and not simply saying one leaker implies the whole world instantaneously and fully believes).
The Trolley Problem is a red herring that distracts from the real danger: government remote-controlled detainment of political opponents, as depicted in Minority Report. Plus, any number of variations: script-kiddies hacking, drug cartel kidnapping, kidnapping/trafficking of women/children, murder-for-hire (drive off cliff), nation-state espionage and assassination. When major crimes, and not just credit card scams, become available to the push of a button, the risk threshold to the criminal is lowered for heinous crimes.
Reminds me a little of Starglider for the Atari ST -- pretty impressive to get real-time 3D perspective wireframe out of the Atari 800.
FTFA:
Might as well just say pwned by Lenin
Those mask cutters look like Bond girls
As any computer systems engineer knows, it's all about compute and storage. This article is about compute. But storage has been vastly improved for all of us. We now store or keep knowledge on the Internet instead of keeping it in our heads. The access time of this storage is very fast, too, compared to paper files and libraries. This access time is also of low variability, as it is in our pockets now.
Only trouble is that in terms of competitive advantage, the Internet is available to all. The best you can do is to learn how to use it slightly more effectively.
But in terms of the Slashdot headline, "You Can't Get Smarter," I disagree -- we've all gotten a lot smarter.
(That's right, I don't agree with those who say the Internet has made us dumber. I think the opposite.)
We already have societies where money isn't used or at least isn't that useful, such as a submarine on a long deployment, which just happens to be the model upon which Star Trek starships was founded.
Outside of starships, the Federation still had to deal in gold-pressed latinum with Quark's establishment. (Whether that was a "site license" or a per-person allowance was never made clear, but we can conclude from the in-story characterizations that Quark wasn't donating out of the goodness of his heart.)
So Star Trek really isn't too far off from today's military environment.
It's not possible to uninstall the Google Search app from Android. /s
From Ars Technica:
No, but we do need to make a decision about the plural of emoji.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=s3&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1
Here is the original MPEG-LA press release. They really did entitle it "call for patents", which is obnoxious because it plays off of "call for papers", which is a call to share technology information, not restrict it. This type of turning a phrase to be the opposite and evil intention of its original reminds me of Braveheart's jus primae noctis.
FTFA:
If "sometime in '20s" was 1929, then this copyright calculator says Jan. 1, 2025.
The economy of Gideon
That's what I thought until someone on Reddit corrected me.
Headline should be "ROTJ-Style Hoverbikes" not "Star Wars-Style Hoverbikes". This is not supposed to be CNN, with its aberrant Apple backs down from Swift headline this week.
Non-competes are not copyrights
And I'm surprised the Minecraft company didn't prohibit this with a non-compete as part of licensing the Lego Minecraft sets.
Theory says that the move to cloud should reduce global demand for servers since each individual company won't have to provide for its own compute & storage capacity overhead and can instead rely on both the "elasticity" and the efficient VM packing/balancing of the cloud.
The reality, however, is that the race to the cloud has cloud providers throwing money into cloud infrastructure and charging customers a pittance compared to the capital investment. This has corporate users of the cloud using more capacity than they otherwise would.