The list is interesting. Jobs or Gates, of course. Lampson, HNers will probably know from his important CS research such as on distributed systems - he'll be mentioned in those sort of history books, although not generalized ones. Kapor: I have to think for a while before I can finally pin him as 'Mitch Kapor, inventor of the spreadsheet'. Extremely important to business and economics and the modern world, almost as important as double-entry bookkeeping, but I don't think Luca Pacoli or double-entry books are mentioned in most history books so probably not. 'Kaye', I have no idea, unless it's a typo for '[Alan] Kay', in which case he could well be in the history books. Finally, 'Roberts'; I had no idea and had to ask Google, and apparently he's the Altair guy, Ed Roberts. The Altair doesn't seem all that important so I could see history books skipping over it and him. So of the 6 (including Gates himself), 3 probably would be, 2 will be in more specialized histories, and all would be featured in the most detailed histories or encyclopedias (indeed, all of them have Wikipedia entries).
I don't know about 'new'. I read Dos Passos's _U.S.A._ trilogy many years ago, and what I kept thinking in reading articles and essays about China's modernization over the past decades is, 'it's just like in Dos Passos!' Especially when you read about some Chinese businessman who has founded a dozen businesses none of which have anything to do with each other after starting as a beggar or something, I kept finding it an echo of the people in Passos. China is really in a similar stage as the USA was in the Gilded Age, right down to the muckrakers in Hong Kong and private security agencies.
That, however, contradicts their other assertion that past researchers have fuzzed the fonts and found many vulnerabilities. They can't both be easily true, so there must be something further going on.
Or MS has fuzzed it but hasn't devoted as many computational resources as Google has. They say that fuzzing-produced bugs have come out regularly over the years, so clearly no one else had before applied as many resources as Google did...
And also regression to the mean (a constant factor in any of these attempts to predict the fall of a big company). When will a company want to, or need to, build a big headquarters? When things have been going very well and the sky seems like the limit.
Or if they get eyetracking+foveated rendering. Then you get super effective navigation between 'monitors' (just look at one) and the rendering isn't so demanding, enabling either more sampling or higher-resolution displays.
If you have to appeal to rare cases such as traumatic brain injury, then it is indeed 'really hard' and not of much interest theoretically or practically; the mind is what the brain does, so that massive damage can cause changes is exactly what one would have predicted already, just as one would predict that intelligence, memory, happiness, language and other cognitive traits can be changed by massive damage... (Even more massive damage can radically change one's personality through a process called 'death'.) It's not that it's an 'outlier' to be discarded, it's that it's not important if it's that rare.
The left hand disagrees with the right hand... How much has polio eradication been set back by the CIA's decision to use polio vaccination as a front for hunting Osama bin Laden?
Kind of weaksauce. One review 50 years ago doesn't override all the work done since, particularly on OCEAN, showing high longitudinal stability of personality traits when measurement error is considered. (What's more interesting is the behavioral genetics of that; it seems that this stability is at least in part due to the stability of genetic influences on personality.) It's also kind of silly to point to prisoners as an example: violent crime always declines with age.
> That doesn’t seem very fair at all. Are there any other management practices where one would optimize for former employees at the expense of current employees? I can’t think of any.
Options with vesting seem little different from pensions in this respect.
No, the basis of my statement is the lengthy sections of the article describing Gray's political power and obstructionism which was causing the district to decay and how his death lead to a vacuum in which the gentrification could happen. Describing it as execution was just gallows humor. They could also be bought off with grants.
Maybe not electric rockets, but SpaceX could start shooting self-driving cars with robotic arms... into space... to manufacture giant solar panels to beam down energy 24/7 to replace all the nonrenewable baseload.
(Or more prosaically, just use the dropping payload cost to launch some big solar sails with energy collectors and then beam it down as has long been proposed.)
His P2P Foundation was hacked afterwards and then locked for good; but P2P Foundation confirmed at the time that as far as they could tell, it was Satoshi.
Traditionally, supercomputers and mainframes have way higher inter-node IO performance like bandwidth than anything you can spin up on EC2. IO is extremely important because it's very rare to have a true shared-nothing algorithm, which means that Amdahl's Law will bite you and make the little bit of IO and coordination a dominant factor. For example, in deep learning, an awful lot of the work is simply moving around and updating data, which has been a bottleneck for attempts to train NNs on multiple GPUs.
At this price point, it's time to start looking at alternative approaches. The original iterative optimization approach is not the only, nor is it remotely the fastest. (There's an upscaling CNN version which runs at like 20FPS but I can't seem to refind the citation at the moment.)