snakeboy

> In our numerical model, we do not integrate the orbit of the Moon and instead use a single particle with the combined mass of the Earth and the Moon.

Is that a standard assumption for this kind of model? For such a chaotic simulation, would it not be very important to approximate the effects of the Earth and moon very precisely? Especially since these bodies would have such dominating effects early on?

Well most dating apps suffer from the problem of actual scarcity, in which they don't reach a critical mass of people to make the effort of making a profile and actively searching worthwhile. Tinder is one of the few that has gone "mainstream" and has reached that point.

Tinder does this to some extent by limiting how many "right swipes" a non-paying user has every 12 hours. I don't know if that is enough of a scarcity to really change any behavior though.

At the very least it discourages the strategy of blindly swiping right as fast as possible and then choosing a mate from the intersection of "those who also swiped right on you" and "people you'd ever consider dating".

From the video:

> I would much rather be acknowledged for the work that I do rather than being a woman doing the type of work that I do.

Regardless of what we can debate about the arguments Damore laid out, does anyone feel that he should have been fired for the memo?

From Sundar Pichai's public statement after the fact:

> First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.

I find this inherently contradictory. How is actual expression supposed to occur if a well-intentioned argument can cross an ill-defined line that leads to removal from the workplace?

> In the first five years of the smartphone era, the proportion of Americans who said internet use interfered with their family time nearly tripled, from 11 per cent to 28 per cent.

It is a pet peeve of mine when these kinds of casual exaggerations enter into a statistic. An increase by a factor of ~2.55 is quite far from a factor of 3.

I could argue the global population has nearly tripled since 1959 [1]. This is a rounding of similar proportions, which would lead you to believe there are 9 billion people on Earth rather than 7.6 billion.

That sleight of hand incurrs an error of 1.4 billion people.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/world-population-to-hit-mi...

For the sake of time, scientists generally prefer to study questions that can't be immediately answered with basic physics.

Reminds me of this infographic showing the revenue streams for five of the largest tech companies: http://www.visualcapitalist.com/chart-5-tech-giants-make-bil...

It still boggles my mind that Facebook makes 97% of its revenue from Facebook Ads.

Do you really think that there is no insight to be gleaned from art?

Can you elaborate on what you mean here?

Isn't B-T just a consequence of accepting the axiom of choice and performing some pathological decompositions of a ball? What do you mean by:

>non-smoothness breaks conservation

The Uncertainty Principle is a very well established result which is quite generalized mathematically beyond Heisenberg's result. This has nothing to do with that principle.

You missed the point of their comment.

The responders' point was that Quantum Mechanics is a different framework for modeling physical phenomena which takes a probabilistic framework, and so if fluid were to be modeled in a similar framework, you could work more naturally with these "vanishingly unlikely" events.

Reminded me of https://accidentallyquadratic.tumblr.com.

Usually I hate this format, but given the ratio of text to images, I don't really think the "tweetstorm" style got in the way. Each tweet was atomized to reveal a bit more of his story in a well-paced manner.

Very minor, but on the website "You snooze, you loose" I assume should read "You snooze, you lose".

Great concept and I look forward to trying it!

They both wanted social revolution, but the execution of their plans lead to tens of millions of unnecessary deaths.

Isn't the societal benefit received by public works a key component of the parent's proposal? I don't see how the jobs outlined would be accomplished profitably by a private entity.

He's already talking about a biological phenomenon, and describing it using an analogy to machine learning neural nets, so the analogy is not biological.

Why do you anticipate no conviction?

> you could do that all over again between 65 and 85, now with the capital and experience to do something interesting.

No reason for your day to be spoiled!

Hopefully your experience is characteristic of most yahoo users, and this breach is less effective because people are using a unique password for their breached account.

Others have pointed out that matrix inversion is O(n^3) and hence computationally infeasible. It is also worth considering that the conditioning of X^t X, k(X^t X) can be as large as k(X)^2, so solving in this way can be very unstable.

In the US, I have to try the chip and fail three times. Then it prompts me to use magstripe. My chip does not work, so have tested this a LOT.

The quote from the parent comment is about halfway through the abstract you just quoted...

> literal nazis

Oh give me a break with the Trump hyperbole. Can I ask for a source?

But it gives no framework for approaching other problems under any kind of new unified theory.

The problem I see with that proposal is that it would entirely eliminate the ability of Congress to compromise on anything, for fear of a video going viral showing them ceding ground on contentious issues and being used against them next election.

What if you just happen to enjoy steak and your friend enjoys chicken? Then in the 50-50 split, you could be seen as "abusing" the system if you two go out to dinner often, yes?

From the abstract,

> This decision is made based on whether the user is on Wi-Fi or cellular, how many bytes are remaining on the user’s data plan, ...

so it sounds like your scenario is already accounted for and you'd be flagged as a "data-heavy" user, for which prefetching would be enabled.

I assume they are referring to the feature in which users comment at specific times in the song. As the song plays, these pop up on-screen.