a_olt

It represents the type of A/V cable used to connect your laptop to the projector

Hmm in some scenarios the colours would really benefit from forming an alliance... :) It's fun to watch how different stories unfold.

Without pausing, just by rapidly adding pink cells at the borders between two colours, it is possible to make one of them go extinct.

http://i.imgur.com/q2OIJNh.png

The last sentence in this article is pure psychological gold:

    "Sometimes when you debunk a myth, you realize part of you kind of liked the myth."

It has very important epistemological implications: it means a phenomenon may follow a deterministic law which, due to its mathematical properties, would nevertheless make long-term predictions impossible. So even though you would have a mathematical model for the phenomenon, you wouldn't be able to make real-world long-term predictions. The problem lies in the sensitive dependence on initial conditions.

The balance may have been obtained from the logs, rather than from actual funds stored in the wallets.

He also lived in somewhat seclusion on a boat, as I remember.

No. 16, 'Chaos Theory' is actually called the 'Logistic Equation' and it is used in biology to model populations. It does exhibit transition to a chaotic regime for certain values of k, but it's improper to refer to it as 'Chaos Theory equation'.

Sorry, just wondering, does your last sentence have a typo?

>>Whereas if you leave your CS PhD, you can get a job at a startup... there are few places that are dying to hire PhD dropouts.

thanks.

I must say, regarding prescient ideas –

Many ideas do "float in the air", so you should take you gut feelings of "what's the next app that should be out there" seriously.

It has happened to me personally that an idea which I thought was "crazy, but perhaps crazy enough to be good" – yet never started working on it – was the same idea a start up had not long before. I could but congratulate them on their genius :)

A little bit of self-doubt is expected from civilised people.

You're wrong in calling my thinking fallacious, because my point was merely to emphasise how reductionistic approaches never give a complete picture, which is why people from a STEM background often benefit from further training in psychology and social sciences. However, Theodores' reply ('A few things:...') does a better job than mine.

Nevertheless, Glazier's fallacy is tangential, so thank you for posting.

Oh sorry, I didn't realise the connotations of "legend". I just wanted to refer to other similar/related stories. Interesting story.

This story is probably part of the "blue collar innovation" legends. For more: http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/innovate.asp

"The legend about a low-level employee who pipes up with a shockingly brilliant yet simple suggestion that either makes or saves his employer untold millions of dollars has long been part of the canon of business legends."

To try balancing the discussion a bit:

On the upside, due to the $8M contract, lots of people were able to work and earn a living. The story also mentions how the team had a great time, and probably lots of useful connections between people were made, and tacit knowledge exchanged. Neither of those is traditionally accounted for by the engineering mindset.

This article discussed one of the solutions proposed by psychologists to relieve drone pilots of the stress and guilt that comes with launching an attack: http://io9.com/psychologists-propose-horrifying-solution-to-...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Das_Keyb... The possibilities are endless, of course :)

Absolutely, I started using a Compose Key for Emoji's, and other new Unicode (no kidding).

This work is not entirely new. Here is another recent article, where it is explained how input to a smartphone/tablet can be reconstructed by analysing reflections of the screen in various nearby surfaces, or the user's pupil.

http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2516709

I watched this, and it's really interesting. From what I remember (and leaving out his astonishing achievements, with which I assume everyone is familiar): Erdos would have no stable residence, instead he would travel the world with all his possessions packed inside a single suitcase. He would 'crash' at the homes of various mathematicians, often unexpectedly. While visiting, he would start banging a spoon to a pan in the middle of the night, to wake up his host mathematicians and insist that they start working on a Math problem. He was very attached to this mother, and her death left him somewhat baffled. He was celibate, and in one interview he says "he likes women, but dislikes what they stand for".

You are disregarding the fact that the vast majority of attacks ARE, in fact, this simple. And your post also fails to mention what is central to Gibson's disclosure, namely the instructions for finding the phone-numbers of SnapChat users. So your post sounds really biased.

GibSec say in their disclosure that SnapChat still uses GAE, and argue that this will make attacks easier/faster due to the server being unlikely to bottleneck.

You are correct in that transparency is to those people like light is to vampires. If you (or anyone else) is interested in the academic treatment of these 'games' (that is what they are called), read Eric Berne's short book "Games People Play". In the book it is explained how what you called "transparency" can be achieved by giving the player the "antithesis" to his game.

Yes, what you need to check is whether your country/state requires one party, or two- (all-) parties consent. See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws

What about the paintings data? Where do you obtain it from?

EDIT: I see the-athenaeum provides that information as well. Do you have a plan to keep up to date with the changes in locations?

Besides the issue of his seemingly trivial prosecution that others posters have noted, I also wonder what he spent the grant on, or planned to?

Just wondering, do you know about http://edge.org ? They also do something similar.

They had to study existing software (empirical), and then find an understanding of what is essential and common to all cases.

The result was that a finite and compact set of concepts could be used to account completely for almost any design architecture, past or future. To me, this is pretty scientific.

Da Vinci was certainly the hacker :)

I know UML is not very popular, but as you can see, I thought it was interesting.

Yes, and this can have very sad consequences – such as very capable people working unreasonably hard on projects which never pick up or don't have much relevance to the rest of the world. It's very important to stay as connected as possible to as many fields as possible; I suppose in the end this is how you become a creative person.