jnty

That sounds exactly like an urban myth along the same lines as 'seatbelts kill more people than they save'. Has it ever been proved?

Worth also noting that rear-end crashes are generally less dangerous than t-bones. For similar reasons, roundabouts can be preferable to standard crossroads even if they result in a higher number of collisions.

Good intent from the labellers isn't always required for a good model but it certainly helps, especially if the model training process is unsophisticated. I'm sceptical enough of this being the case for poorly-paid annotators - surely for prisoners it could be even worse?

This is seriously impressive and very pleasant to listen to.

This is surfacing now with relevance to the debate about fake news, but it's really more about what we would call reconstructions today presented without disclaimer at a time when it wasn't necessarily assumed that everything you saw was real (or maybe the accepted ethics on doing this hadn't quite settled down yet...)

It's still relevant though as reconstructions or animations can easily be used to mislead even if they are clearly not original footage.

I thought this was going to be a polemic relating to the debates going on about banning smacking in Wales and Scotland at the moment!

Yep - It's a good and useful feature. But it's very poorly pitched. Calling it 'retention management' or something would have made it sound like the boring administrative management tool it is, rather than a magic self-destruct button.

It's disappointing that the article doesn't lead with this limitation. We (and everybody who's used Snapchat) know that self-deleting messages aren't truly possible, but there's no reason everybody should.

This is definitely a useful feature to manage sensitive documents within organisations where good faith (but not necessarily diligent policy adherence) can be assumed, but it's pitched dangerously wrong as you say.

Short-term lets don't have to contravene current regulations to cause a residential housing crisis.

He misrepresented the article. It does not claim that racism 'explains everything', merely that it was one of a number of factors which have led to the demonisation of MSG. That was a disingenous attempt to erase the effects of racism through ridicule.

This is fun primer for OpenCV but I'm not sure I understand why you'd want to do this.

No, a significant part of it (in the UK) has definitely been stereotypes around Chinese food being somehow 'dodgy'.

Clearly racism doesn't 'explain everything' and the forces you mention played a part, but you're the only one who brought up that strawman. (You should think carefully about why you're so desperate to disingenuously downplay the effects of racism on modern attitudes.)

A key reason is that off-peak services are often subsidised by on-peak services, so to economically provide a good all-day service the whole thing needs to be provided by the same operator.

Double 50% is 100%, so assuming your market doesn't significantly grow, it's impossible to double your market share again.

It is bizarre that we are discussing making cars entirely autonomous as a way of improving safety, but refuse to consider the much more feasible option of technologically restricting speed on public roads.

There's no feeling quite like going 'what the hell was the person who wrote this thinking??' and then doing a git blame and making a humbling discovery.

Given the alternative would be working while being sedentary, I think it's probably a fairly good (if odd) setup? I'm assuming he doesn't take the laptop like that when we he wants to walk to the shops at the weekend.

Of course drivers in cities do expect 'bikes coming out of nowhere' because, unless you literally separate bikes with a 6ft wall, you can in fact still see them despite there being kerb-separation in place. At car/bike junctions with poor visibility the same interventions are available as for car junctions with poor visibility.

If you've ever seen a mangled barrier by the side of a road, you'll understand why encouraging humans into the road as a traffic calming strategy is rather problematic.

Enlightened cities such as those in the Netherlands tend to take a risk-elimination approach - residential streets will be designed to keep speeds low, and neighbourhoods designed so that through-traffic doesn't try to take shortcuts along them. This makes it safe for cyclists to use the roads without special infrastructure. Only busier main roads have infrastructure. This is hard to imagine in the US where many cities in the US seem unfamiliar with the concept of any road not being a busy main road!

In the UK, people against 20mph limits often oppose them while claiming that they're never able to get above that speed anyway. Why are they opposing it then? The answer is simple - it's not true and on many streets you're able to drive at 30 or over (if you disregard other people's safety). I would sincerely doubt this was any less the case in the US where traffic lanes even on 'tight' streets seem to be stupidly wide. Many drivers also seem perfectly happy to break the speed limit in their desperate rush to get the back of a queue or to a red traffic light.

It's all very well having cars going at 40mph past you on a bike until the driver of one of them gets distracted or makes a simple mistake and hits you. Then you'll wish they were doing 20!

I swear you only got downvoted here for using the word 'irregardless'

It may still be the case in the UK that it's illegal to receive ('intercept') radio communications not intended for your consumption, even if they're broadcast in the clear. It's not an unusual class of law, does make some sort of sense (even if enforcement is very hard!) and it seems like receiving ADS-B would be covered by that.

Are you a parent? Of a child over ten?

They still have the effect of depressing wages with a component that is uncertain, volatile and liable to theft.

There was a never a 'golden age' of tipping where everyone was getting paid fairly. Make no mistake, tipping was and is usually used as a way of justifying lower wages.

It does when large resellers suddenly drop their entire range as unprofitable.

It's more likely to be soot from coal burning, which was the norm for much of these building's life.

This reminds me of Chris Speed's toilet paper sensor experiment. Although it's more frivolous, the fairly detailed analysis of the ethics and sensitivities around monitoring people's visits to the toilet seems to apply equally well for this invention...

http://chrisspeed.net/?p=1529

Given that bulbs have always been electrical devices capable of malfunctioning and burning our house down, we have been living in it for decades.

Without wishing to sound flippant, as a society we've developed a mechanism to control the allocation of scarce resources - pricing. It sounds a lot like the parking you're describing is extremely underpriced, both in the demand/supply sense (demand is outstripping supply) and in the externalities sense (impacts to tourism, issues like air quality caused by traffic hunting for a space, walkability death spiral etc.)

For such a capitalist country as the US, the die-hard attachment to free or overcheap parking is really odd.

Cynically, I'm going to say you either find unsurprising matches (eg. photos of the same group of people taken on different days) or even more convincing and hard-to-detect false positives.

If your goal is explicitly to find something extremely rare - unexpected face matches in different places - you will be flooded with false positives even if the false positive rate is fairly low.

I think the issue summarised the first line the author writes: "I’ve been hospitalized once in my life."