"Then there are situations such as the ESA which isn't strictly an EU organisation but "
Note.
Canada is an ESA member, and I presume a contributor.
Could be "space" may be the easiest Brexit problem to solve.
Maybe.
16330 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
all of the bad banks would have gone bust "
True.
I always liked Georg Soros's line that "Capitalism without bankruptcy is like religion without Hell."
Where does this "Banks are special" BS come from (apart from banks)?
They are businesses and IRL businesses sometimes fail. Their staff get fired and their assets get sold off to someone(s) else. It's sad, but it's life.
My personal suspicion was a real auction would have disclosed just how much of their supposed "assets" were CDO's or similar instruments and that 95% of their "yield" were expected to come from the the mortage repayments of John and Jane Q Crackhead of "Rundown Sh**hole, USA"
Who turn out to be having some issues keeping up the payments.
But be under no illusions this s**t would not have been possible without the active collusion of the so called "rating" agencies who rated an insturment 5%gold/95% s**t as good as one 95%gold/5% s**t.
For them it's still BAU.
That depends on what you mean by "A few"
A few farmers?
The Agriculture & Horticulture Development board did an impact assessment. Under all scenarios most of British farming is f**ked. Only pig (and in some cases poultry) farmers prosper. Sheep, cattle, dairy and barley get a serious kicking unless HMG replaces the whole CAP en block.
Which means unless the the UK landscape is going to change a lot for anyone using the UK countryside as no one is going to be looking after it much. On the upside. Lots of opportunity for building new houses. Wheather or not they will be any more affordable is another matter.
UK universities got £8bn from the EU while the UK contributed £5Bn over the same years for science research. That's all going away, along with any EU money for startup spun out of the research.
What, me worried?
Noooo.
He got the users to hand over a shedload of their personal details to them and the stockholders to hand over a tonne of cash for a business that's basically a server farm in assets and whose dividend policy has a P/E ratio measured in centuries.
Why wouldn't he think he could hand any random stranger a plate of dog poo and get them to eat it?
He already has. Twice.
Or do they need the LIDAR output to go on the blink before they realize this?
I got a shedload of downvotes for commenting that Uber seem to be the only company whose driverless car experiments have actually killed someone.
By that I meant someone who had nothing to do with testing. I view anyone sitting inside a vehicle whose motion is controlled by this technology chose to take part. And have no illusions this tech is still experimental.
OTOH Every other road user (unless the vehicles path is clearly marked in advance) is just a potential unwitting victim. They have no choice.
and I think that depends on wheather you allow non binary weightings on the surrounding cells.
A loosely related question is how do humans link stuff we think about (I must see Jane at 3pm) into what is in effect (increase weightings of NN cell cluster just behind my left eye and a bit down, or wherever) ?
Which is talked about here
Well given Gauleiter May's desire not to accountable to the ECJ yes you could.
But.
Have you never heard the expression "Turkeys don't vote for Christmas" ?*
Although I'm sure JRM would find a traditional British hanging so much better than those nasty Continental firing squads, or the rather clinical IE non traditional lethal injection.
"Vet potential clients much more thoroughly." *
*CA's sales pitch is basically "We win your election for you"
No qualifications about your suitability.
No qualifications about wheather the other candidate(s) is/are better than you.
No qualifications about how we will do it.
This is basically the SOP for any marketing/advertising but this in an election contest and they are being much more covert about it. The appearance (on social media) of being "just normal folk like you" which is fact total bu***hit.
Zuckerberg: Do I look bothered? Is this my bothered face? Really?
And rightly so.
He knows people have very short attention spans and are dumb enough to reveal damm near their whole lives to complete strangers on FB in ways that (had they been asked those questions IRL) would have them thinking "WTF, this guy is beyond creepy."
Facebook is an ecosystem. And in an ecosystem there are predators, prey and parasites.
I'll leave others to work out which is which.
An HP spokesperson explains their strategy.
<gollum>
We wants it
We needs it
We must have Novadigm, Shunra, Peregrine, half of the Mercury portfolio, Fortify, OpsWare, Vertica, Tower, TriLead.
</gollum>
Joking aside it sounds a lot like the Computer Associates strategy of
1) Buy up as many competitors in a market niche (usually mainframe) as possible
2) Data mine their customer base to see who uses other CA products
3)Figure out which one is the most profitable
4)Dump most of the development staff (if you haven't already done so)
5)Call round all the customers and tell them about their new (higher) priced contracts and/or get them to migrate to our preferred option (where we might have kept a couple of devs on).
Something some guy parachuted into the top spot isn't going to share.
So I guess the question is with the share price halved how much investor value did his tenure destroy?
So If you believe getting rid of him puts them in turnaround (I think the replacement is a long term MF employee) there's never been a better time to buy...
OTOH If you think he's doing a Carillion there was a better time to sell, but it's already gone.
Time to roll the dice?
If done right and they lose the case they simply tell the FSB
1) Here is the algorithm we use to encrypt the data.
2) As you see we don't have to hold the decryption keys.
3) Nor do we hold the decryption keys.
4) Here are the copies (if they exist) of the messages you requested.
Because if these guys are for real it's the FSB that's f**ked, not them.
Since McCulloch & Pitts in the 1940s people have accepted the brain is a very large number of (relatively) simple elements with a lot (up to about 10 000) wires into (or out of) them (that contrasts with about 10 for single gate on a microprocessor chip) of an unknown number of layers in depth.
Human "Learning" is theorized to be the process of raising or lowering the weightings of the signals on each of these connections.
"Deep" learning seems to mimic this structure.
But humans don't learn this way normally. No one sits reading a book thinking "I much raise the weightings of the neural cluster just down and to the right of my left eyeball," or even knows where that information will be stored (in any real sense)
Instead we operate at levels of abstraction so far above that that we are not even conscious it exists (unless you have a knowledge of neurobiology to begin with).
In IT terms that sounds like a "Virtual machine" rather than a system running on the "bare metal."
IOW all existing systems are (essentially) writing in the equivalent of NN "assembler." At best the data structures are static, like arrays in 1950's FORTRAN
This can't be an original thought, but every time I Google it all I get is how to run an NN simulation inside a VM, with one exception , and that was in a fairly narrow problem domain. However I'm assuming the answer is already yes, as that's what we are (unless someone out there really can manipulate their NN directly). SF has the "Langford death parrot" and Neil Stephenson's "Snow Crash."
There is a precedent for this in Conways "Game of Life" with the self propelling structure called the "Glider" and the discovery of a "Glider Gun" structure to make and launch gliders across the cell array. I'm still not clear was this "discovered" by random fiddling, or did someone systematically design it (IOW did they have a deep understanding of the problem in the first place?).
I'm curious about 3 things.
1) Who first thought of this idea of a VM running on the human NN. It's got to be older than 1992 (when Snow Crash was written).
2)If "deep learning" systems are already starting to evolve their own internal representations, or are they still too simple to have this ability?
3) Deeply abstract but neuro linguistic programming (NLP) deals with identifying and changing human behavior using a variety of techniques. Can it be applied to deep learning systems, or are they not "deep" enough?
Note. I'm not talking about the structure of the networks (that's basically fixed) I'm talking about the patterns of firing and weightings evolving over time to create a higher level representation of the information. A dynamic data structure inside the NN architecture.
Human beings process facts. Human beings process sounds. Human beings process images.
They don't process connection weightings on the NN inside their own heads.
So what's between the photons spelling out "Tommy broke the window" hitting your eyeballs and you thinking "Ahh. Tommy did it" ?
<hyperbole mode>
Fear not, Stout Hearty Yeoman of Blighty.
Within a year this Green & Pleasant Land shall throw off the yoke of bondage of the hated Euro oppressor.
Once more such funding decisions will no longer be in the hands of overfed feckless Brussels Eurocrats*
God Save the Queen.
</hyperbole mode>
*They will be instead be in the hands of feckless, clueless Whitehall bureaucrats instead.
You have it backwards.
It's very good for states to find anyone writing code they don't like.
For those sorts of state a 35% failure rate is acceptable. *
*"Better a 100 innocent men are punished than a single guilty man escape" as a well known psychopath once put it.
Except when it comes to the wholesale surveillance of all electronic communications used by a UK subject in the UK of course.
As for these "unexplained wealth" confiscation thinggies how many of those exiles are fiends of 'ol Dobby?
As other commentators have noted some UK financial institutions are deeply in the hole to Russian money and of course post Brexit the UK will need all the "friends" it can get.
Who wouldn't choose now, with the British government in maximum chaos, to administer a little post-departure discipline and remind all currently serving IO's that Dobby does not forgive and he does not forget.
By handing all its design data to the US.
That indeed will be transformative.
Some will say that this is "Historically inevitable."
Like the downfall of the Soviet Union. Like "The end of history."
And like such "Hitorical inevitabiliites" it is also completes bu***hit.
What, that your CEO jumps ship after they sort out big, unrecoverable bonuses for them selves?
That they low ball a contract and use the fees to pay suppliers they've not paid from the last low ball contract they signed?
That this BS is driven by an ideology, which has very little actual (if any) evidence that it delivers actual savings when subjected to independent scrutiny (IE by someone who's CV won't be hugely enhanced by it seeming to have worked) ?
I think such criticisms of Carillon (and "The model") are spot on.
Not even that.
Voyager took decades to get to Jupiter.
Just getting a system that could get a serious fraction of light speed would be big start.
So far this looks at various "laser launch" ideas and the "fission fragment rocket." Turns out the fission fragments from a nuclear reactor (normally trapped inside the Uranium Oxide pellets) are moving at about 5-10% of the speed of light. Very tricky engineering, but no new physics needed.
His real crime was showing how easy it was to fool the SEC into thinking he was part of the company.
You can get away with anything if you don't make a federal regulator look stupid*
*Yes, even the FCC. Sweet Pai makes himself look stupid. The FCC doesn't look stupid. The rules that allow someone like him to be parachuted into the top spot make the Federal Government look stupid in turn.