Classice Govt IT F**kup template #3. Implement a good idea in the worst possible way.
See NIRS II etc.
16330 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
But don't you feel that the criminal has been punished?
Because AFAIK that's the core idea of the British system.
BTW IIRC the UK has both the highest proportion of its population (per 1000 head of population) and the highest repeat offending rates in Europe.
But no one likes a "Bad guy" and everyone loves governments "getting tough" on crime.
With a place at prison costing more than a place at a University (not even a good university) you could (literally) pay each repeat offender £20k/pa to not commit another crime*
Like farming "Set aside" for crims, not famers, which HMG seems to have no trouble doing.
Are you f**king kidding me?
How long has "EUV*" been coming "real soon now" for?
Last time I looked transistor widths are at 140 atoms wide, with oxide layers 1/10 that.
*Because Extreme UV sounds so much easier than "Soft X-Ray Lithography" which is exactly what it is.
"We now have 16 core, 32 thread desktop CPUs."
Amdahls Law suggests (kind of like a critical path analysis) that you can only speed up an algorithm until you get to the part that cannot be run in parallel. That is the minimum (or critical) path.
And that's as far as your speed up goes.
Amdahl's law dates from around the same time.
Except it shows no signs of being broken any time soon.
Shouldn't a security impact assessment be part of every commercial product?
Oh no, sorry. Chip designers are special.
Why? Because of the scale of their f**kups?
Not everyone used the same processor for remote management
But everyone did manage to f**k the implementation up.
Not even that.
Watch out for any new unlimited liability partnerships being set up.* He sounds dodgy as f**k. Very much a "What's mine is mine, what's yours is mine, and what I own is still mine" mentality.
You'd be pretty stupid to be a supplier to this guy. Guaranteed he wont' pay o time to start with.
*This used to be the legal form for doctors, lawyers and accounts practices but new ones are limited liability. They are simply obsolete. Unless you want to be scrutiny or can't be in charge of any other business legally.
That is basically what is being said whenever some meatsack hides behind "The computer/process/algorithm.system has disapproved your request for <whatever>"
I saw something that nicely sums it iup.
"Discrimination is prejudice in action."
Algorithmic "decision" making is institutionalized discrimination baked into software.
Well in line with US Corporate (Blame the victim for our incompetence) culture. *
*More like what you find growing on cheese that's been in the fridge for a few months after its sell by date than artistic and social refinement.
I'm not sure about that.
AFAIK SX have used 3D printed parts for some time and the Masten "Broadsword" (Methalox 65Klb dual fuel & LOX expander) is meant to have been entirely 3D printed.
If you mean first fully 3d printed engine to orbit then that also would be a "Start of the Art."
So much in rocket engineering has been done (at least in part) before that you have to drawn the boundaries for truly new innovation quite carefully.
1) First CFRP LOX tank flown to orbit ever
2 )First rocket engines powered by battery driven electric propellant pumps ever
That does not just make them the State of the Art.
That makes them the Start of the Art.
Something to think about.
Trump looks like a school bully and such types are naturally attracted to other (more successful) bullies.
But Trump is basically someone whose genes gave him height, looks and a personality disorder with a good deal of superficial charm.
I'm not sure if Putin has any of these things, but he did have a career in the KGB.
Trump's biggest weakness is he believes he is Putin's equal. I think "Pampered, entitled, Park Avenue poppinjay" is nearer the mark.
The last thing you need in a country brimming over wit bu***hit is someone stirring the cauldron.
So yes, the US should be worried about the behaviour of all foreign powers sticking their noses into it's business.
In fact all countries should be bothered about other countries sticking their noses into their business.
Since when is any of this a "defense" project?
And I'm scratching my head to recall which other ones have actually happened so far?
Or are these the very highly completely ultra top secret defense projects?
Or does that include building a new refugee camp in Calais, since that's technically the UK border now?
Or would that be demolishing the Channel Tunnel as part of May's policy of "Brexit means Brexit*"
*Actually what that means is a tautology, which is basically meaning-less.
Boeing set the standard at 17inches in the 50's and want to leave it up to airlines. Airbus want to set a minimum of 18 inches.
Yes human body measurements have changed in the last 70 years and the average human back end is bigger than it used to be.
Wrong.
Concorde actually had a pretty substantial order book.
What hammered it was a) The protracted battle to get it into New York (all the BS about noise issued turned out to to BS, despite being designed for the noise requirements of the late 60's, when most airliners were turbojet, not turbofan) b) The price of oil multiplying by 4 overnight in 1973 c) US sour grapes over p**sing away $1Bn+ (in 1960s $) to build a really nice plywood mockup. d) It's range was a bit too short. It needed to reach Frankfurt to get the German market to the US as well.
As the delays getting into service lengthened the potential customers looked elsewhere. The upgrades planned for the 17th Concorde onward would have meant it no longer needed any afterburner (people forget Concorde was the first "supercruise" aircraft, although 40 years later I believed the Typhoon and F35 can do so as well)
Con-gresspeople seem to think this is OK as long as they "control" these people.
They simply don't get it.
No one controls data fetishists.
You could make a case that for data fetishists "democracy," even of the kind practices in the US is the enemy.
"How dare elected representatives ask how many US citizens we spy on, like they have some right to know such things.*"
*As one of them might put it to their friends.
After all "perfect" software would need no support, would it?
So no need of a support contract, right?
Let me suggest that this attitude (conscious or not) has a lot to do with the state of modern software, and vice versa.
I'd love to see a software house set up to approach every job in the sort of methodical way IBM Federal Systems (the model for the CMM5 level) did it.
But it took them a long time to get there.
Will be testing an Oxidizer Rich Staged Combustion rocket engine with the thrust level of the Spacex Merlin 1d mfg in India at a Russian test stand.
The US ULA has been buying RD180's (also ORSC) from Russia for the last 16 years and the US/Russian JV that slaps made in USA on the packing crates "upgrades" and "certifies" them for US use has been claiming they could mfg them in the USG if paid enough money, but it's so hard because "y'know this techs complicated and we don't really know how to do this stuff and all the blueprints are written in Russian and none of us speaks Russian and the metallurgy is tricky and and"
Undercutting other bidders to guarantee the win. Check
Using existing revenue to make up any shortfalls if the underbid too far. Check
Aggressive acquisition strategy driven by CEO with large ego. Check.
Senior stuff pay & benefits substantially expanded (and probably secured against future failures) Check
Service goes TITSUP when too many contracts underbid below cost suck up the all actual revenue from their core business. TBC
We're just missing the heavy borrowing from the banks to finance a lot of those takeovers that turn bad when the UK BoE interest rate rises for the first time in nearly a decade (who could have guessed that was going to happen?)
I think the commonly used numbers are ax10^10 neurons with 1x 10^14 connections. IOW 1 neuron could be receiving input from 10 000 other cells.
IIRC the usual rule of thumb for MOS transistors is they can drive up to 10 other inputs (but in digital logic you normally size them to drive however many you know you're driving, which might be just a couple).
Back in the day 10 billion neurons was vastly beyond the simulating abilities of a computer. But today, with server farms of vast numbers. Note also the highest frequency brain waves are around 15Hz (although "clock frequency" is not really a useful concept in brains. There does not appear to be the equivalent of the "pacemaker" cell area found in a heart).
True.
Cortico is not one of them.
"Semantic folding" is very much based on chewing on a shed load of data to construct an N dimension vector and look for words that are "close" together in some sense. They are large binary sparse matrices, allowing much compression and the ability to run comparison using the sort of Boolean operators common in most MPU instruction sets, but they are absolutely in the "Throw a metric f**k load of text at it and something will come out" school. :-(
Once I saw that I immediately thought of the Binary Neural Net work in the facial recognition system developed by London University called WIZARD. It's also got features in common with speech recognition approaches using "Time Warping" to cope with words spoken at different speeds (something else most humans can cope with up to a point).
9 pages into Cortico's 59 page White Paper and my BS meter is redlining like a Geiger counter in the engine compartment of a Cold War era Soviet nuclear submarine. Lots of verbiage, little insight. Why does the word "Autonomy" keep flitting through my mind as I keep reading?
I smell a BFR.*
*Big F**king Rat.
Indeed.
Actually as that's a query the easy answer is to check the listeners internal model and answer it.
That is an NLP problem, and illustrates that the questions "What does a sentence mean?" reduces to "Queries or updates on the listeners internal model of whatever it's about," even if the listeners internal model is "WTF are you babbling about." No model, no capacity to make a model, means the question (or any sentence) would be meaning-less.*
Recognizing the question is actually a very tricky attack on your personal behaviour is rather more of a general AI question and (I'd suggest) much harder.
*This should be pretty much SOP for NLP, but I've yet to find someone actually state it directly. I'd love a reference. I'm guessing Winograd did so, somewhere, but I've not had time to hit his thesis.
Well strictly speaking you can think this is what it probably means, and if you're wrong you can reconsider, because that's what humans do with words they haven't seen before.
The paradox with "intelligence" is we know a lot about the hardware it runs on, and we know it's a long way from the world of registers, RAM, MMUs and so on of anything approaching a conventional computer architecture (and by these standards all computer architectures are "conventional.")
And yet we can split the task into (apparently) higher level functions that don't seem to map to the model neural networks we can run on computers.
Hmm.
Perhaps we should consider the idea that the human NN operates like a VM for some kind of "higher level" representation that breaks the problem into smaller parts?
Exactly.
Although (AFAIK) no such thing as a "Bandersnatch" exists you can still do limited reasoning about what it is.
So there's a this-is-a-noun process running, a stuff-we-know-about-nouns-whatever-they-are process and a stuff-we-know-about-nouns-of-living-things.
That doesn't mean people don't build a big dictionary in their heads throughout their lives, but it
does mean they don't need it to begin with.
Well that sounds like a class action lawsuit waiting to happen.
The obvious ones are the "Victims of crime" because of crims who (a superficial look at) would look like poor risks for re-offending. 8 years for Jon Warboys perhaps?
OTOH there should be a case for people held in too long as well, but that's going to be trickier to prove.
I'd suggest a search into "Northpointe'" history.
I'll also bet this software is a lot more expensive than the cost of a few MT staff.
Worst part of this BS is it's not AI.
It's some sort of regression analysis using data from past offenders and then measuring which factors (probably a damm sight more than 6) affect the result (IE return to prison)
Off the top of my head.
Type of crime.
"Shot her rapist" doesn't sound like much of a repeat offender risk to me. OTOH "Moved in with a women with 3 kids and molested them all" has done it 3 times already, so kind of does.
Treatment.
Feeding a drug habit has resulted in prolific repeat offending, but rather less if they seek, not forced onto, rehab.
I suspect there are limits on accuracy based on the catchment area of the sample, but that maybe just my bias
This sounds like scamware that's about as useful as that "bomb detector" that ex cop sold the Iraqis for a shedload of cash that turned out to be complete BS.
In the name of a US cop show "this is all Bull."
That was sort of my point.
A hell of a lot of places it's a) No broadband at all or b)1 supplier who's the successor business to the company that installed the line decades ago and hasn't had to spend a dime on the line since.
Depending on the box they may not have even bothered to send out an installer, just a parcel with "This is your new STB. Replace your old cable box with this and switch it on, otherwise your TV and internet is f**ked."
Now I seem to recall there's a cockpit duress code which basically translates as "we are being hijacked." I think it's either 3(o4) 6's or 9's.
I wonder how difficult it would be to spoof the system into thinking an aircraft had sent such a message?*
Should be very difficult indeed. But IRL??