Frqy3

While there were some interesting insights in the article, they are not the unintended consequences alluded to at the start with the reference to IMPs and the early Internet leading to the disruption of journalism.

An example of an unintended consequence of fully autonomous vehicles would be what might happen to where people want to live and hence the structure of communities and property values.

Even if the car is paid off, there is still the opportunity cost for the value of the car being invested.

Also, that is the raw output from the antenna array. This is then analysed before storing, compressing it down to a much more managable few GB/s.

Your online identity is also more valuable if Facebook can link your profile in with data brokers such as Acxiom.

Sun purchased a souvenir set of the purple Gemaco Borgata (with the punched hole) from the casino, so it sounds like these cards are in regular use by Borgata. Probably they use several different patterns, and Ivy requested this particular pattern for play.

I think defining political is going to be tricky. For example, is a discussion about fake news vs censorship political? Is the answer different if we are talking about China vs the US? What about discussing a company that provides fake news detection as service?

The idea of using a fake result to break a paradigm has been used in a number of science fiction stories. I believe that the earliest is "Noise Level" (1952) by Raymond F. Jones, though the idea originated with John W. Campbell [0]. I first came across this concept in Robert Silverberg's "Double Dare" (1956) [1].

[0] https://nevalalee.wordpress.com/2016/09/28/astounding-storie...

[1] https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1956-11/Galaxy_195...

The critical part is the difference in how those on the right and left rate articles that are viewed as right or left leaning. No prizes for guessing how that will turn out.

The DNC's mistake was misunderestimating (sic) Trump. The media played their part too.

When newspapers and television news held influence, most countries had media ownership laws.

Humans and algorithms will have bias, but a diversity of bias is good.

If industry cannot implement some self regulation, it risks finding itself with external policy and regulatory controls.

Here is a modern version of the same scam [0], using social media accounts and deleting the wrong predictions while the account is set to private.

[0] https://medium.com/message/how-to-always-be-right-on-the-int...

I remember Doyne Farmer giving a talk on this 20+ years ago. The basic premise is that each table has a slight tilt to it, and this can be calculated by measurements of the ball position, velocity and landing position over multiple spins. While the concept and maths was interesting, the amazing part was the wearable shoe computer that they built. Some photos are on his wikipedia page [0].

Apparantly they did some consulting to the gambling industry afterwards and that is the origin of the diamond-shaped obstacles which add more unpredictability to the ball.

Though given the Real Hustle video posted by another commenter, the same idea still works today, but the calculations involved must be more significantly complex to compensate.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Doyne_Farmer

> more robust or complicated

In my experience (mostly in networks) these are two different things with a negative correlation between them.

An example of bikeshedding perhaps?

Also, the managers who sign off and make the final decision on which office plan to go with tend to spend most of their own work time meeting and talking to people, rather than needing to sit and concentrate on something for several hours. I expect this influences a cognitive bias when these managers consider the productivity level of an open plan office.

I like the title the Australian public broadcaster went with: "Small robots are getting teenagers pregnant, study finds"

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/small-robots-are...

And the networks on both the sender's and receiver's side keep a copy of the messages for a certain time. Depending on local data retention laws, these may then be kept for some mandatory longer period.

A similar argument applies to traditional economic tasks.

Clean your own house - no GDP.

Pay someone to clean your house - GDP.

Same amount of work is being done, but GDP only counts what is paid for.

My billing address is my post box. Some companies refuse to ship to post boxes (probably due to concerns over fraud) and then my shipping address is of course different to my billing address.

Golly [0], an open source, cross-platform application for exploring cellular automata, includes the Wireworld ruleset and some example starting patterns.

[0] http://golly.sourceforge.net/

And sometimes those recounts uncover issues of ballots having gone missing [0].

[0] http://aec.gov.au/Elections/federal_elections/2013/wa-senate...

I think this issue could be overcome by a proxy/delegate style system. With the ability to change proxy/delegate at any time, we would have ongoing accountability and move away from the problems of election cycles. Even better from a representation viewpoint (but more complex from a design viewpoint) is the option to have different proxies/delegates for different decisions/topics.

The real problem is balancing tradeoffs, particularly between spending and taxes. Currently (in Australia at least) the size of the expected budget defecit is a crude metric for the overall financial responsibility of the government and is a factor in elections. If citizens can vote independently for spending versus taxes, then there is nobody to hold accountable (tragedy of the commons).

Similarly, I hope that voice interfaces don't become popular in open plan office environments.

Not too hard to find.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-op...

The tough part is the cellular structure to the frequency usage and handing live calls smoothly from one cell to the next.

Some background on this guy: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160308/08034033830/guy-w...

With the infrastructure available today we should be able to do a hybrid direct-representative model and also have multiple representative delegations that we can change on an ad-hoc basis (i.e. not just at elections).

For example, on some issues, I might like to do the research and make my own decision, while for other issues I might trust and delegate to a representative for that set of issues, and for a third set of issues I might trust and delegate to a different representative.

From what I've seen, it is mostly Southerners (南方人) or Western people taught by Southerners who have trouble with distinguishing between endings such as -n and -ng.

Also, pinyin IMEs can be fairly fast even with only minimal practice as the matching is done at the word level (and possibly some IMEs look at preceeding characters) rather than at the character level. For example, when entering 南方人, my tying sequence was "nanfangren<space>", and the IME was already suggesting the correct answer at "r", so I could have actually typed "nanfangr<space>".

As someone who has taught themselves Chinese (lower intermediate level) as an adult, I agree with your assesement.

An equivalent premise to this author's would be to say that the inconsistent spelling and grammar of English is a millstone around its neck. The mention of the 'character amnesia' issue is similar to the same drop in spelling ability we see in Western countries amongst people who primarily write using computers.

I initially learnt simplified characters as I was travelling mostly to the mainlaind for work. Later, when I was doing more work in Taiwan, I picked up the traditional characters. It is not difficult as only some of the characters changed, and mostly it is the key radical that was simplified (like the speach radical 言) or else common characters like the default measure character 个, so once you learn these it is fairly simple to shift between the two (at least for reading).

As others have noted in these comments, pinyin is not a substitute as it is not a 1-1 mapping. That is part of the reason why spoken Chinese differs from written Chinese, being less concise and more verbose to impart additional information to assist with the decoding from sounds back to meaning.

Those 'democratic' countries you mention are using the same features themselves.