But you don't get to say they got it wrong, you are just one voice in millions.
Sorry - you DO get to say "they got it wrong" and you DO get to say (sorrowfully) "I told you so".
The reason is this - at the end of the day there IS a right and a wrong and history will show who got it right.
The previous referendum on this issue produced a much bigger majority in the opposite direction - so if you believe that the majority then got it wrong then you can't insist that the current (much smaller) majority got it right!
As if the UK government hasn't shown itself to be equally capable of coming up with this kind of hare brained nonsense completely unassisted by the EU.
If infinite monkeys can accidentally create Shakespeare, then what of an intelligent machine that can create every possible permutation of words millions of times per second? Reality check here.
A work of literature may be of arbitrary length - but just consider something similar enough - shuffling a pack of cards where each of the cards may be either inverted or right side up.
A quick calculation show that even if all the matter in the observable universe had been optimally organised into a computing machine since the big bang it wouldn't have got through all the possible combinations yet - by many orders of magnitude - so NO this particular problem doesn't exist.
Re: Wait, if they can identify factors that lead to a high risk of reoffending...
I don't see any mention of these algorithms being used to recommend education and training, psychological counselling, employment assistance, community service, or any other form of rehabilitation that might ACTUALLY reduce the recidivism rate.
When for profit prosons were first mooted in the UK the suggestion was made that they should be paid by results - ie some of the fees would be held back until the prisoner had been released and had not re-offended for a set period.
That would mean that the market mechanisms would be working in our favour and the kind of algoritms you describe would be worth investing in.
Considering that blacks are protected by the (current, amended) US Constitution...communities. etc etc
I never said that the US was perfect - but really these imperfections are nowhere near to being on the same scale - or as uniform - or as strongly endorsed by such an all-pervasive ideology.
And when was the last time an American politician as assassinated for trying to be too nice to minorities?
and if you can think of one did a big section of the population turn out to protest in favour of the assassin?
Still, in Kuwait, isn't the war against apostates decreed from the top? Yes - but as in the article it is enforced by self appointed vigilantes.
Kind of shatters the illusion that the people of the middle east really want freedom
People in the Sunni parts don't want freedom - they have been subjected to 40 years of well funded Saudi salafist propaganda. They are worse than most of the governments - which is why we should back Assad in Syria - he is bad - but he is better than any plausible alternative.
Iran - however is different. They have had nearly 40 years of Islamist extremism and have now learned to dislike it.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Got a few barnfuls of hay for that needle hunt you were busy with...'
As for the MLK reference, you do know it was the southern democrats leading the charge against equal rights? Also, the Dems lost the civil war and spent the next 100 years trying to stop civil rights so who is really the party of the establishment?
Over long periods of time the identities of parties change because issues change. The 19th century is not comparable to the post war period.
While that could be true and debatable regarding gun control, doesn't negate the fact that they current admin would love to bury the link to terrorism, which they tried to do.
That was - sort of - my point really. I don't see the two things as mutually exclusive
"Just because Ben Johnson is on drugs it doesn't mean that Carl Lewis isn't an a**hole*"
You know it is perfectly possible that the religious thing is an issue we need to deal with AND the US also needs better gun control. They are not mutually exclusive.
*Disclaimer Carl Lewis is actually a good guy - but you get the point.
It was only a "technical" ad hominem, I didn't take it personally!
Descent+initial approach+final approach=35%. That's more than landing (24%)
Yes you can read it that way - however it does sort of depend on which numbers you choose to add together.
My reasoning was that the phases of flight that are inevitably low and or slow account for the majority of accidents. In those phases, all other things being equal, an aircraft with a lower stalling speed will generally be safer.
Of course there are other factors.
The safety scrutiny that commercial airliners operate under far exceeds that of private aviation. Hence private aviation is much more dangerous - and flying cars would definitely fall under private aviation rules because they would otherwise be uneconomic.
The accident rate in private aviation is only tolerated because it is such a minority pursuit.
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
Well it has happened a bit quick this time.
History repeats itself - the first as a referendum the second as football!
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
Sorry - you DO get to say "they got it wrong" and you DO get to say (sorrowfully) "I told you so".
The reason is this - at the end of the day there IS a right and a wrong and history will show who got it right.
The previous referendum on this issue produced a much bigger majority in the opposite direction - so if you believe that the majority then got it wrong then you can't insist that the current (much smaller) majority got it right!
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
As if the right is itself innocent in this regard!
Ever heard of Senator Joe MCarthy?
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
Actually there has been a tendency in the UK to blame the EU for everything. It's been an easy target for anyone trying to excuse themselves.
That is why we are doomed.
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: No wonder Brexit happened
On the post: Another Dumb Idea Out Of The EU: Giving Robots & Computers Copyright
Re: Re: Re: What could possibly go wrong?
Reality check here.
A work of literature may be of arbitrary length - but just consider something similar enough - shuffling a pack of cards where each of the cards may be either inverted or right side up.
A quick calculation show that even if all the matter in the observable universe had been optimally organised into a computing machine since the big bang it wouldn't have got through all the possible combinations yet - by many orders of magnitude - so NO this particular problem doesn't exist.
On the post: Proprietary Algorithms Are Being Used To Enhance Criminal Sentences And Preventing Defendants From Challenging Them
Re: Wait, if they can identify factors that lead to a high risk of reoffending...
When for profit prosons were first mooted in the UK the suggestion was made that they should be paid by results - ie some of the fees would be held back until the prisoner had been released and had not re-offended for a set period.
That would mean that the market mechanisms would be working in our favour and the kind of algoritms you describe would be worth investing in.
Crime, and the prison population, would fall.
On the post: The Campaign To Dox Twitter Users In Islamic Countries For 'Blasphemy' And Supporting LGBT Rights
Re: Re: Re: "White guilt"
I never said that the US was perfect - but really these imperfections are nowhere near to being on the same scale - or as uniform - or as strongly endorsed by such an all-pervasive ideology.
And when was the last time an American politician as assassinated for trying to be too nice to minorities?
and if you can think of one did a big section of the population turn out to protest in favour of the assassin?
Still, in Kuwait, isn't the war against apostates decreed from the top?
Yes - but as in the article it is enforced by self appointed vigilantes.
On the post: The Campaign To Dox Twitter Users In Islamic Countries For 'Blasphemy' And Supporting LGBT Rights
Re:
People in the Sunni parts don't want freedom - they have been subjected to 40 years of well funded Saudi salafist propaganda. They are worse than most of the governments - which is why we should back Assad in Syria - he is bad - but he is better than any plausible alternative.
Iran - however is different. They have had nearly 40 years of Islamist extremism and have now learned to dislike it.
On the post: The Campaign To Dox Twitter Users In Islamic Countries For 'Blasphemy' And Supporting LGBT Rights
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Got a few barnfuls of hay for that needle hunt you were busy with...'
Over long periods of time the identities of parties change because issues change. The 19th century is not comparable to the post war period.
On the post: The Campaign To Dox Twitter Users In Islamic Countries For 'Blasphemy' And Supporting LGBT Rights
Re:
No
On the post: The Campaign To Dox Twitter Users In Islamic Countries For 'Blasphemy' And Supporting LGBT Rights
Re:
Twitter is already being bought by the Saudis- just in case.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/07/saudi-princes-investment-stake-twitter-alwal eed-bin-talal-kingdom-holding
On the post: DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34996604
On the post: DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That was - sort of - my point really. I don't see the two things as mutually exclusive
On the post: DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I've seen these arguments before - and from where I sit they just look like a complete load of cobblers.
American arguments about gun control are a bit like American Sports. No one else in the world cares!
On the post: DOJ Rushed To Link Orlando Shooter To ISIS, Now Plans To Redact What He Said During 911 Call For... Reasons
Re: Re:
"Just because Ben Johnson is on drugs it doesn't mean that Carl Lewis isn't an a**hole*"
You know it is perfectly possible that the religious thing is an issue we need to deal with AND the US also needs better gun control. They are not mutually exclusive.
*Disclaimer Carl Lewis is actually a good guy - but you get the point.
On the post: Will We Ever Really Get Flying Cars?
Re: Descent fatal accidents 35%. Takeoff 20%. Cruise 13%.
Descent+initial approach+final approach=35%. That's more than landing (24%)
Yes you can read it that way - however it does sort of depend on which numbers you choose to add together.
My reasoning was that the phases of flight that are inevitably low and or slow account for the majority of accidents. In those phases, all other things being equal, an aircraft with a lower stalling speed will generally be safer.
Of course there are other factors.
The safety scrutiny that commercial airliners operate under far exceeds that of private aviation. Hence private aviation is much more dangerous - and flying cars would definitely fall under private aviation rules because they would otherwise be uneconomic.
The accident rate in private aviation is only tolerated because it is such a minority pursuit.
On the post: Will We Ever Really Get Flying Cars?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Altitude + Airspeed = Safety
Argument ad hominem at best - however....
It is the SAME DATA! Note the years surveyed are identical - suggesting that the ultimate source is the same.
The ultimate source of both is Boeing; see here:
http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/pdf/statsum.pdf
as your source admits.
If you look at page 21 (or 20 depending on how you number the pages) you will see a slightly more detailed version of the diagram in my source.
So takeoff is 7%, initial climb is 6% final approach is 24% and landing is 24%.
Total 61%
Descent is only 3%.
On the post: Judge Doesn't Find Much To Like In 'Material Support For Terrorism' Lawsuit Against Twitter
Leakage
What we see here is an example of "leakage" of that concept into other domains.
Just goes to show what adangerous concept copyright actually is.
Next >>