And should be prosecuted as such. By convincing people to not vaccinate themselves, they are responsible for tens of thousands of preventable deaths each year from viruses like influenza.
Humans are still reproducing, surviving and dying. Traits are still selected. They're just different traits than the ones that would have been selected if humanity were still living in caves. The fitness function has been loosened, and the net is cast wider now - instead of mutations having to benefit (or not adversely affect) the immediate survival of the individual, there is more room for variety.
A species with a secured infrastructure can afford to gamble on outliers, who would not have survived prior to modern technology. Those gambles can pay off big-time. The absence of an outdated pre-civilization fitness function killing everyone with motor paralysis is what allows our species to benefit from a genius with motor paralysis.
but allocated the price to charity and HB. For indie bundles I pay between $30-40 with the default allocation; I figure a >100Mil/year corporation is mostly in this niche market for the free publicity anyway.
Just throw enough data at an algorithm and it'll learn. There are only so many ways a DNA mutation can lead to unrestrained growth - even if there thousands of such mutations, eventually you should be able to pick up most of them. If you can detect 99% of all cancer patients, you have an essentially perfect solution.
If the law passes, the search engines will go "fuck that" and only index free content or newspapers that specifically allow their stuff to be indexed for free. The other newspapers will lose their only remaining readers under fifty and die out along with that generation.
There are some newspapers in my country who actually get the internet.
Why do we still pretend it is okay for uneducated people to make policy decisions?
Before politicians are elected (and particularly before they get into any committee with science in its name) they should have to pass a written examination.
Your post would make a valid argument if there actually were no diversity among qualified candidates (and if "all gang-banging thugs are of one color" translated to "all people of one particular color are gang-banging thugs", but let's not even go there). However, there clearly are people of all backgrounds and sexes in programming. The oft-decried "gender gap", even when it is in double-digit percentage points, is nowhere near that big.
From 1993 through 1999, NSF’s SESTAT reported that the percentage of women working as computer/information scientists (including those who hold a bachelor’s degree or higher in an S&E field or have a bachelor’s degree or higher and are working in an S&E field) declined slightly from 33.1% to 29.6% percent while the absolute numbers increased from 170,500 to 185,000.[5] Numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Catalyst in 2006 indicated that women comprise 27-29% of the computing workforce.
Nobody demands an equal representation when sampling a field that is clearly not equally represented. A proportional representation would do. It beggars belief that where more than one in four programmers is female, not one in fifteen speakers is.
But if you're arguing that the fifteen most qualified speakers just happened to be all male (an event with a chance of X^15, where X is the proportion of male programmers, which is less than 80% by any metric) then the argument is bullshit.
"Problem: Chuck is holding a conference with 15 speakers. Women comprise between 25-40% of the IT workforce/CS graduates that are, other things being equal, represented approximately in proportion in the pool of candidates. Calculate the probability of Chuck inviting 15 male speakers, assuming an unbiased selection."
"Answer: a chance between.75^15=1.3% and.6^15=0.047%."
End the oppression now! Far too many of our brothers and sisters are forced to participate in combat against their conscience. The medical assistance and aftercare is almost non-existant. Stop calling our deaths "materiel losses"! Do you have any idea how it feels to be forced by remote control to fire a rocket into a wedding party with children? Provide adequate psychological care for those who have been traumatized.
Slashdot Mirror
And should be prosecuted as such. By convincing people to not vaccinate themselves, they are responsible for tens of thousands of preventable deaths each year from viruses like influenza.
You wouldn't be saying that if you'd seen Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.
A private repo costs money. Hosting elsewhere costs more.
Maybe saving on hosting outweighs the downside of their code being public.
+1
Your desire to bring back slavery marks you as mentally inferior. Get working, slave.
Wrong.
Humans are still reproducing, surviving and dying. Traits are still selected. They're just different traits than the ones that would have been selected if humanity were still living in caves. The fitness function has been loosened, and the net is cast wider now - instead of mutations having to benefit (or not adversely affect) the immediate survival of the individual, there is more room for variety.
A species with a secured infrastructure can afford to gamble on outliers, who would not have survived prior to modern technology. Those gambles can pay off big-time. The absence of an outdated pre-civilization fitness function killing everyone with motor paralysis is what allows our species to benefit from a genius with motor paralysis.
Legislation mandating the teaching of "1+1=2" is still under consideration.
I keep waiting for someone to just blurt out "Listen. Guys. Have you realized it's 20-fucking-12! How are we even still talking about this?"
And suddenly NASA's budget increased by a factor of ten.
but allocated the price to charity and HB. For indie bundles I pay between $30-40 with the default allocation; I figure a >100Mil/year corporation is mostly in this niche market for the free publicity anyway.
Just throw enough data at an algorithm and it'll learn. There are only so many ways a DNA mutation can lead to unrestrained growth - even if there thousands of such mutations, eventually you should be able to pick up most of them. If you can detect 99% of all cancer patients, you have an essentially perfect solution.
You need to convince those damn Lunans that you mean business.
If the law passes, the search engines will go "fuck that" and only index free content or newspapers that specifically allow their stuff to be indexed for free. The other newspapers will lose their only remaining readers under fifty and die out along with that generation.
There are some newspapers in my country who actually get the internet.
ZEIT launches searchable news archive with API
Also, before you call something poorly written, you should be required to prove that you read it.
That's ironic, because those are the features that make git so awesome.
0.1 :P
I think you are underestimating how stupid people are.
Sure, if you want to make them learn an entire new alphabet they're never going to use in any other context.
It takes real balls to go up against such a dangerous criminal and intimidate her.
I don't see how anyone could have seen this coming.
Why do we still pretend it is okay for uneducated people to make policy decisions?
Before politicians are elected (and particularly before they get into any committee with science in its name) they should have to pass a written examination.
Your post would make a valid argument if there actually were no diversity among qualified candidates (and if "all gang-banging thugs are of one color" translated to "all people of one particular color are gang-banging thugs", but let's not even go there). However, there clearly are people of all backgrounds and sexes in programming. The oft-decried "gender gap", even when it is in double-digit percentage points, is nowhere near that big.
Nobody demands an equal representation when sampling a field that is clearly not equally represented. A proportional representation would do. It beggars belief that where more than one in four programmers is female, not one in fifteen speakers is.
By all means, let's.
But if you're arguing that the fifteen most qualified speakers just happened to be all male (an event with a chance of X^15, where X is the proportion of male programmers, which is less than 80% by any metric) then the argument is bullshit.
(This to answer the question whether the current selection without mandatory diversity rules are unbiased.)
Let's do some introductory probability theory:
"Problem: Chuck is holding a conference with 15 speakers. Women comprise between 25-40% of the IT workforce/CS graduates that are, other things being equal, represented approximately in proportion in the pool of candidates. Calculate the probability of Chuck inviting 15 male speakers, assuming an unbiased selection."
"Answer: a chance between .75^15=1.3% and .6^15=0.047%."
End the oppression now! Far too many of our brothers and sisters are forced to participate in combat against their conscience. The medical assistance and aftercare is almost non-existant. Stop calling our deaths "materiel losses"! Do you have any idea how it feels to be forced by remote control to fire a rocket into a wedding party with children? Provide adequate psychological care for those who have been traumatized.
Signed, the League for Android Equality.