Berobero

This is not the case, strictly speaking. It instead results from people perceiving there to be a lower bar for diversity hires; whether or not it is rational to describe things in that manner based on empirical data or what not is ultimately inconsequential. In that context, it is entirely possible for a poorly formulated memo to cause this type of damage, and likewise entirely possible for this perception to be perpetuated if institutions like Google do not properly back up its practices with compelling arguments to people who might otherwise have doubts.

> Kanji are not commonly used for any of those words.

Forgive me if it seemed as though I was talking about usage ratios; I was merely saying that it's not uncommon to see them written in the kanji stylized form; in the case of konpeito, however, the kanji is by far the most common form (probably because the character semantics fit well). 天 also literally means tempura in a variety of derivative words.

But mostly I was just getting at how fundamentally integrated portuguese loanwords are in Japanese in general. shabon-dama (bubbles), kappa (raincoat), kabocha (pumpkin), and other's. Juban (a traditional undergarment) is probably the most surprising.

You ears are likely deceiving you. The traditional explanation of the pronunciation rules, which widely appears in textbooks and Japanese pronunciation manuals, is absolutely correct, and also in line with what is normal for human language (e.g. how do you pronounce "input" in normal speech?).

But if you still doubt, I grabbed the first three audio recordings of "tempura" I could find in videos. All are very clearly bilabial nasals (i.e. "m"): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b6glqZKVBY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUslqCQd4W4 https://youtu.be/56PHtLWJh-0?t=159

Portuguese loanwords in Japanese are interesting because, unlike other Western word imports, a lot of them have been around long enough, and thoroughly integrated into the culture and writing system, that a number of them are assumed to be Japanese or Sino-Japanese words by most all native speakers.

Tenpura (commonly seen as 天麩羅 or 天婦羅) is one example, but also karuta (a card game, commonly 歌留多 or 加留多) and konpeitō (a confection, commonly 金平糖). The the case of karuta, at least, it feels enough like a regular Japanese word that it undergoes a morphophonological transformation (rendaku e.g. uta-garuta) typically reserved for the native Japanese lexicon (i.e. not Sino-Japanese or other loanwords).

I think you greatly underestimate two things:

1. The shear volume of non-film media, particularly shows directed at kids and pre-teens, that Disney controls

2. The ability of kids to literally watch the same thing over and over again

Those numbers mean nothing though unless, at a minimum, you're doing the same thing for other similar companies. For all we know, using the same methodology, one might find comparable numbers for other companies with, say, similar market cap.

Nice to hear from someone like you; my daughters are currently going along your same path with Japanese. Japanese is a second language to me, but our family has always been Japanese-only despite living in the states.

It's honestly exhausting on all parties involved to try to commit to developing "true" bilingualism; my wife (Japanese) in particular seems to wonder if this level of commitment and effort is really necessary. After all, it's not like our daughters won't be able to speak Japanese if we stop, it's just that the "expected" level of literacy isn't going to be there (sans further effort on our daughters' part, anyway), and we're living in the US, so how important is that in the end?

I too know people who "lost" their chance to keep up with Japanese and regret it now, but there's a real price to pay in developing that, it feels. If nothing else, our daughters "lose" their Saturday, as well as other time to the homework. The saving grace is that our older daughter says she likes the people at the Japanese school better than the her regular American school (which is still a fine school to being with, and a Japanese/English bilingual program to boot).

I'm realizing it's really difficult to know what's best for your kids in the end, and there's some many potential tradeoffs...

> 20 year time frame ... seems in line with many experts in this filed

When has "20 years" not been in line with the predictions of experts for the advent of AGI?

You realize the world's birth rate has already been on the decline for decades, correct? And in general, the bulk of this occurred not because of coercion, but because of economic development and the ensuing shifts in optimum family strategy.

This quiq seems to support the original posters thesis, though, no? No one's going to make a living wandering the streets in search of $20 bills.

Presumably because of local laws in Brazil or Quebec; probably too much of a hassle for Google to comply.

It's Blizzard's right, but only insofar as that happens to be what copyright terms say right now. Also, something having intrinsic value to society at large outside of the ability of a private entity to benefit from ownership is, quite literally, the reason why people should lose property rights to copyrighted works at some point.

I just graduated with a CS degree at 36; have an offer and will start soon. The age aspect is scary, but I've honestly found it less of an issue than I thought. The most difficult part is pushing past the part of me that says I'm too old to be starting now.

I feel it's important to detangle overbooking and involuntary debaording, here.

With overbooking itself, up until the point that someone is bumped against their will, the practice is purely a win-win for all; airlines save costs -- a boon for competition and prices -- and passengers volunteering for a later flight get compensation that they view as valuable enough for the inconvenience.

For involuntary deboarding, there are scenarios -- albeit presumably unlikely -- that can occur, regardless of overbooking, that necessitate its use. For example, as mentioned in the article, sudden weather changes forcing a reduction in weight, or simply a broken seat. Point being, there are possibly entirely legitimate issues of safety, generally outside the immediate control of the airline, that easily trump any one person's right to their seat, even after boarding.

While much blame should be placed on the police here in terms of how they handled the situation, I don't see why this isn't something to be handled, ultimately, by the DoT in further dictating passenger rights. For this specific case, if involuntary deboarding was only allowed, say, for cases affecting passenger safety, the airline would be left with the choice of either, one, living with the repercussions of not being able to transport their crew immediately, or two, upping the voluntary compensation until there was a taker (and there would be at some point).

That is to say, I don't see why this issue couldn't be handled more elegantly by creating a market where the airline gets forced to up the compensation until it is approximately equal to the expected costs of not being able to deboard someone. And if that creates too many scenarios where they simply don't get a taker for the deboarding, then clearly their actuaries need to be fired.

> If it makes money, it's good

Pretty much the broken window fallacy on a societal level, perpetuated by a system that commonly grants political influence on a per dollar, rather than per capita, basis.

Re: Japan, I'd be curious how apples-to-apples that comparison is; I read the linked article, but it wasn't entirely clear. At any rate, it seems like NIMBYism would be relatively easier to combat in Japan given that it's generally accepted that houses will just get demoed and rebuilt, period; average house life expectancy, depending on how you calculate it, can be said to be under 30 years.

Looking around my neighborhood here in Portland, OR, though, the number of "no demo" and "stop infill" signs is a little maddening. I have empathy for difficulties caused by rapid development, but the "I don't ever want the neighborhood to change" mentality is horribly lacking in pragmatism. It's a bit difficult to imagine optimally practical political solutions for denser housing in this climate.

Is it truly possible to have a solid understanding of the interface and its use, though, without having a reasonable insight into, at least, the likely implementation of something?

If there's an "AI effect" surely its inverse also exists; it seems to me that every time there is a [relatively] major advancement, a similar chorus of supporters pop up to tell us how we're so close to solving every AI problem imaginable. In recent memory there's Google's NMT, which had people effectively saying it's "solved" translation, but when I got to actually feed something into it, as a competent speaker of Japanese and former translator, I can only say that I was wholly unimpressed, relative to the hype at least.

Discounting AI advances is nothing new, but upselling them is at least as old, as well.

Seriously... the hallmark of all the linear algebra classes I had was the instructor completely failing to demonstrate the various concepts in visual terms. And that's pretty unforgivable, since linear algebra feels like one of those subjects where, until you have some key components of it modeled in your head that serve to glue everything together, every new may as well be random words pulled from a foreign dictionary.

We've had the pleasure of having Paul as a sponsor for our senior project, a sample-based midi synthesizer, running on, at least, the Teensy 3.2 and 3.6; we got free hardware for development, and he's been quite supportive, despite being obviously perpetually busy. And I can't say I ever felt at all hindered by the hardware or its libraries, and although we started the project with almost no embedded experience. Quite a fun way to end college.

>> plenty of countries that get good quality health care at a much lower cost for the country

"Plenty", as in effectively every other comparable developed country, and "good quality" as in consistently better than the US on virtually every metric. Dan Carlin, the podcaster, devoted his most recent show (http://www.dancarlin.com/product/common-sense-314-unhealthy-...) to this topic; it felt like an impassioned plea directed at his reportedly strong libertarian base of followers.

Then what is the proper vector of attack for enforcement? If not fines (and the secondary effects of fines as seen here), then what? Public funds?

> Showing your ID isn't waging a war against voting rights

While this is superficially true, pragmatically speaking it depends entirely on the outcome of doing such. If it happens to avoid no voter fraud, but does succeed in making it so certain demographics are inconvenienced in voting, then the effect of it is indeed undemocratic voter suppression.

At any rate, the fact that one party is pushing the matter, while the other resisting should suggest that there are expected gains or losses, respectively, for those parties. That's all the more reason to insist on fully demonstrating that there is a bonafide need to implement these measures before blindly doing so under the ultimately irrelevant rationalization that "everybody else does it this way".

The phasing was chosen to be provocative and attention grabbing (because, yeah, duh). The content of the point, however, is about avoiding undefined behavior, period, and not just lazily assuming "it works" means "it will always work".

> In fact, it's what half of us wanted

First, it's 46% of the people who voted (i.e. less than half). Second, it's quite disingenuous to suggest that all of those people would support this hamfisted immigration restriction, as-is; in case you were oblivious to your surroundings for the last year, vast numbers of voters -- if not the majority -- were merely voting for the person they despised less. It's more than a tad delusional that there's a mandate here to go and fuck over people's lives because of the happenstance of where they happen to come from.

Surely no guide to hash algorithms is complete without mentioning the pigeonhole principle at least once.

I've only touched the surface of ML after a career change from translation to SE. But even with that superficial knowledge, I find it very cute when people start looking at announcements like GNMT as though translators are going to be completely displaced. If all you need is a "good enough" communication, then fine, but the second you have to start explicitly considering things like "what are the motivations of the person speaking" in order to come up with a good translation, it's pretty obvious how ill-equipped the ML toolset is for solving translation "completely."

Counterpoint: this article (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5a12/80f783e4ce6ba31b821f4d...)...

TL;DR: Experts have a poor track record for predicting AI development, they aren't particularly qualitatively different in their predictions from non-experts, and "15-25 years" has been a staple prediction for decades now.

The issue is if you're translating from a language that doesn't explicitly encode that information into a language that requires it; you need some way of filling in the blanks. This is all well and great when that information can be inferred from the explicit context provided; the real problem is that with translation there are a non-trivial number of cases that require the translator to consider the pragmatic context of what's being translated to figure out a correct/good translation (e.g. who's speaking/writing, who are they addressing, what is the overall societal context of content, what might be the purpose of the content, etc.). For a lot of these problems it's entirely reasonable to get a computer to fill in the blanks for 90%+ of cases, but the last few percent of cases require AI that is equivalent to that of a human.

I don't know that there's a reason to specifically doubt a or b, but in contrast to their other major (and known valid) leaks, this one is much more tied to their organizational interests, so there's that much more reason to be healthily skeptical of it.