That's exactly why people will ignore the symptoms till they fall dead. This virus will be an interesting lesson for both China and America: China will learn the cost of being too authoritarian, since people there are afraid to seek help, and America will learn the cost of greed, since people here are afraid to well.. seek help, but for financial reasons.
It's not just the reality of life, it's the essense of reality. Everything "real" is looks like the Ship of Theseus and if something doesn't look like that ship, it's not real.
If you wrote this with a double intent, you would be a great politician, seriously. By the double intent I mean that on the surface level this clever speech looks good and convincing, but between the lines it delivers the opposite evil message.
The techies are against this because they know the technical side and understand how fragile this seemingly secure system is. This is the equivalent of 737 MAX story: the execs shout how solid the plane is, while engineers cry the opposite. They speak up because they are on the losing side: if this system gets implemented, it won't be them who will control the votes.
The "major security risks" are intentionally there. These are backdoors that allow the right people to control the votes.
We don't need 100% voter turn out. We only need voters who care. There are a lot of people who don't care and have no time or desire to learn about what they vote for. These careless voters are often easily manipulated by media and thus someone who controls the media would love all these people to vote.
The nation policies would indeed change immediately: it would be a rapid erosion of those rights we still have; and if "forward thinking" means repealing 2A, then no thanks, I'd rather use my backwards thinking here.
Why does everyone downvote this comment? Imagine this is master Yoda is asking a naive looking question to make you think.
USA is ruled by laws, not people. The laws can serve as a veil between those who set them and those who follow them. Online voting enables the SkyNet plot: laws are voted for online, but it's AI who casts them.
I'm pretty sure there is a competing botnet that would be happy to override votes of your botnet. If online votes are counted only once, then what matters is which botnet is faster and has a better link to the voting servers. High Frequency Voting, in other words.
Here is an educated voter who wrote some tech standards and knows a good deal about all this encryption stuff. WA Sec. of State is absolutely right here. We can't secure online systems even when most parties want to make them secure: all these data leaks prove that. When stakes are high, such as the ability to influence voting, this online system will be broken and backdoored before it sees the light.
My observation from past 10 years is that 10 years ago 1/2 cops were nice and 1/2 cops were harsh, but professional. These days 1/2 cops are nice and 1/2 cops seem to actively create troubles out of thin air. Each interaction with a mean cop was saved by what I'd call status illegibility: the cop wasn't sure whether I'm a rich connected trouble-maker or just look like one. Short conversations with some cops reminded me typical conversations with professional corporate sociopaths when you aren't sure whether the person you're talking to is a skillful sociopath who tries to get something on you or just a chatty dude. Long time ago, when I was young and naive, I got pulled over by a seemingly friendly cop who felt very chatty. I gave him way too much information because I didn't understand what was going on and gave a wrong answer to a request to search my car. What probably saved me that time was his next question about where I work. After my answer he promptly returned my DL and let me go.
Music produces sophisticated colorful shapes that aren't visualizeable, yet visible to our mind, so it sees the shapes, appreciates their complexity and order and creates emotions. Classical compositions produce exceptionally complex structures that can be appreciated only by a few.
Connection between music and dreams is a very deep rabbit hole from which there is no return (in a good sense). This article does a good job at bringing attention to the topic, although ideas presented there are naive.
That's an interesting case. Can you feel fear, anger or excitement when awake? Dreaming and emotions are "done" by a very specific part of us that connects, in some sense, mind with body.
Rather than studying how to be a good doormat (oh, I meant, how to master the behavioral interviews), it's a much better use of time to read the G. Morgan's "Images of Organization".
This question sends a message "I'm a boss, you're a rank-and-file employee. Now, when we've made it clear, do a little self shaming."
Imagine addressing this question to a senior lawyer that you need to sort out some complicated situation. I guess, the lawyer would be first stunned for a second and then insulted that he's being treated like a kid.
This often doesn't mean much because when there are tons of highly capable engineers, anyone could write that library and it's only a question who had a chance to do it.
I think it's the people in power are applying the usual divide and conquer technique: they add more women to tech, alienate men and women and keep them busy fighting each other. How to alienate them? By giving special preferences to only one group. This is a textbook technique.
The power structures are sociopaths' club. If anything, I'd rather say that it's powerful people prefer to be men, than being a man gives one any power. Most of the men are clueless powerless people.
I think anyone can memorize 32 character passwords every 6 months if one uses some scheme. I usually use long phrases from books: a phrase that means something to me is easy to remember and even if I forget it, it's easy to look it up. Such passwords can be arbitrarily long.
Wow, 5 posts attacking Google in the HN top right before Christmas. That can't be a coincidence. Someone with money clearly has personal issues with Google, but I don't see what this is to do with Christmas. P.S. I'm not defending Google as it's indeed done some questionable things, but 5 posts at the same time is really rare event.
Actually, J.D. can be the one to organize software developers into a em.. guild: an organization with membership fees, staff lawyers, accountants and all that. The organization could start with the non-compete agreements nonsense. He's surely a controversial figure, but that only makes him more visible, and he has personal reasons to start such an organization. With the 250/month fee you only need 150 members to get the ball rolling. The memberships need to be sufficiently obscured and Damore has the suitable background to get the anonymity right. One idea is to use the DBAs - name aliases that can be registered with your company to hide your identity. Every member would be an LLC, but I'm sure software devs have money and ability to overcome this minor obstacle.
That's an interesting read. However what it describes looks like a very shallow version of lam-rim chen-mo, volumes 4-5, that explain the concept of emptiness and the danger of falling into nihilism. Edit: the tricks like "powertalk" and "information poker" are interesting, but rephrasing the book, manipulating people is not a game worth getting good at.
A web grandmaster see I. Office365/GoogleDocs should be very interested in this stuff and by "very" I mean 50 millions at least (they burn way more money on complete bs projects). It's very likely that the author knows more than I do, but it seems reasonable to work out some sort of dual-licensing deal: one for corps who want to take it and develop further and one for smaller businesses who are ok with saas-ish solution.
My guess is that what I'm asking for isn't that complex and could be done by a few serious mathematicians in a few years. The dynamics of tanh(Ax+b) is hardly more complex than Naiver-Stokes equation or the modern topology theory.
ML is more like alchemy, I'd say: mixing components using intuition and experience, but without understanding what these components really are and why they work. In this analogy, AI is the recipe to make gold and the ML alchemists haven't invented nuclear physics yet.
Let's consider a simple image classifier: 64x64 grayscale input, 10x1 output that detects 10 classes of images. The model: y=tanh(Ax+b). You'd probably say that there is no way this will work because this model is too simple. But can you explain why this won't work? Can you tell what the maximum accuracy this model can reach? What kind of datasets this model would work better on?
[Edit] Whether this model works is question. Sure, it can't recognize dogs or cats, but what if the dataset is 0-9 digits? Now it suddenly works, right? And works really well. But what's changed? Can we describe in mathematical terms what makes the 0-9 dataset so special? It'll probably work with A-J letters too, but what about hieroglyphs?
The math I'm looking for would tell that E(T) is the error and on such model and such dataset, E(T)=exp(-T^2)+O(exp(-T^3)), according to such and such theorem; and according to another theorem, if the dataset is isomorphic to that manifold, E(T) can be improved to O(exp(-3T^2)).