alexbeloi

I have this game too, it goes by the name Quarto.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarto_(board_game)

My understanding is that even with the two year $99 Applecare+ for your phone, you have to pay them an additional $79 if your iPhone needs replacement.

Those regulations prop up Chinese businesses at the expense of economic efficiency (higher costs for consumer goods).

To your point, it's not necessary or beneficial (in general) for US or Europe to act similarly. Western industries are highly developed and specialized, such regulations hurt consumers in order to prop up industry. So sure, if you want your manufacturing and textile jobs to stay in your country then you can have such regulations, but the cost of that is everyone in your country pays +X% more (in value, e.g. higher price or lower quality) for textiles and manufactured goods, which is what the Chinese consumer is doing right now for cars and every other highly regulated import good.

Not far from mercantilism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

Key whitening is about expanding the key space, not changing the plaintext prior to encryption (which might be called data whitening).

Say you encrypt a message M with key K1 and get encrypted message E: encrypt(M, K1) = E. An attacker might brute force your encryption, if your key space is small this might be an issue. So what you can do is XOR the message with another key K2 before encryption and a third key K3 after encryption to get: E = encrypt(M XOR K2, K1) XOR K3. Now the attacker has three keys to brute force. (though I think the actual effective key size is between 2x and 3x the length if the attacker knows the message distribution)

I'm not an expert but I imagine XOR is popular because it's a basic logical operator and so has gate level hardware implementations.

I've liked that interpretation of the title better than the one from creator

>The "black mirror" of the title is the one you'll find on every wall, on every desk, in the palm of every hand: the cold, shiny screen of a TV, a monitor, a smartphone.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/dec/01/charlie-b...

Every post is a miniature pyramid scheme. Like those chain letters that say 'send a dollar to everyone on this list, then add your name to the list and pass it along to everyone you know'.

There's some app that uses the face++ api to do login using facial recognition, I can't recall the name of it off the top of my head but maybe you can find it with that info.

edit: how could I forget, it's the little known app called Alipay.\s

How does that compare to the time it takes to write code vs test code? Maybe not quite that extreme, but test code is time consuming, and is essentially what theorem proving is.

Yes, but somebody still has to pay or donate their time and the 'human' computational time require is pretty heavy for an object detection task.

It's also usually ideal to just have one person label one image, people often miss things or mislabel things. If you want low noise data, you need to have people repeatedly labeling the same image until they reach a consensus. The more objects the more opportunity for confusion, requiring more labeling.

You have probably been prompted to use captcha-like thing for selecting portions of an image containing a street sign. That's object detection, for a single class of object.

To answer your question, yes it should be crowdsourced, yes it is being crowdsourced, but the companies that are doing it are keeping the data to themselves because of the value/expense in collecting it.

I think the point was that the costs are justified by the burden of meeting regulatory requirements, not the benefit of the regulation.

I think relevant game theory is happening within the leader's cabinet, if the leader feels their position is under threat and things are spiraling out of control, one risky option is to create a crisis and use it as an opportunity to cull dissenters and shore up loyalists.

>Who is the author of aufs or overlayfs? Should these projects work with no recognition while VC funded companies with marketing funds swoop down and extract market value without giving anything back. How has Docker contributed back to all the projects it is critically dependent on?

Here's an exert from a docker blog post from 2013[0]

>>Under the hood Docker makes heavy use of AUFS by Junjiro R. Okajima as a copy-on-write storage mechanism. AUFS is an amazing piece of software and at this point it’s safe to say that it has safely copied billions of containers over the last few years, a great many of them in critical production environments. Unfortunately, AUFS is not part of the standard linux kernel and it’s unclear when it will be merged. This has prevented docker from being available on all Linux systems. Docker 0.7 solves this problem by introducing a storage driver API, and shipping with several drivers. Currently 3 drivers are available: AUFS, VFS (which uses simple directories and copy) and DEVICEMAPPER, developed in collaboration with Alex Larsson and the talented team at Red Hat, which uses an advanced variation of LVM snapshots to implement copy-on-write. An experimental BTRFS driver is also being developed, with even more coming soon: ZFS, Gluster, Ceph, etc.

I think the real nature of your complaint is that you want the recognition to be in the form of cash.

[0] https://blog.docker.com/2013/11/docker-0-7-docker-now-runs-o...

>What? As far as I know you shouldn't put your gender, age or photo in the CV because the company who review it can be sued for discrimination. (A recruiter from US made me delete that information when I was applying to us companies).

You're not being misinformed, this is probably good advice.

Your demographic information doesn't have to be on your CV for your name to be cross referenced with a government database (audits I mentioned are done by government offices or government contractors), which you would probably be listed in if you are working in the US.

>Isn't Google ratios similar to Facebook and other companies in San Francisco? (But not to other states).

I haven't read anything about any audits that have said they have a significant bias one way or another, I don't think I've said anything to suggest otherwise.

Google and other large corporations are known to do self audits of their hiring practices (demographic and otherwise) both to improve their hiring processes as well as to identify and correct discriminatory practices (mitigate legal risk), they are allowed to collect demographic information for the latter purpose.[0]

[0]https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-...

My personal opinion is that Google's demographics changes are a simple result of changes in the actual applicant pool, and that Google 'promoting diversity' doesn't change their internal hiring process in any meaningful way. But the press about it probably does encourage lesser represented people to join CS majors in university. So google does promote diversity in engineering, just not in the way the author of that article suggests, and instead with marketing and a 4 year time lag.

They sample resumes from various source (online hiring boards, recruiting companies, etc.). They also do compare companies to their industry average for their region to see if a company is hiring abnormally compared to similar companies. Companies with 50 employees have a lot more variation than companies with 1000 employees, they're very aware of the related sampling biases and do the best they can, they employ a good amount of statisticians and sociologists. The margin for error is also quite high, the kind of auditing I'm talking about is meant to catch very serious, long term, company wide systemic discrimination.

After companies grow to a certain size (I think >50 employees), they are also obligated to record demographics information about applicants in the form of voluntary surveys in their application process.

>But we don't have any reference what was the goal of the diversity program to make any assumption.

In California, when companies are audited by the government to check for discriminatory employment practices, they're checking that the employment ratios are relatively close to the ratio of the pool of applicants, not some prescribed ratio like 50/50.

In decision trees more than half of the optimization time is spent doing sorting (sorting the set at each node to find the optimal splitting for the key at that node), in neural nets it's almost all matrix multiplies. That's where the speedup difference comes in the CPU v GPU comparison.

I'm not really versed in this topic, but it seems like using a database for a socket makes the system entirely centralized around that database. Is there something I'm missing?

The obvious answer is that the returns on global warming and solving crises is hard to quantify, and selling gadgets is easy(easier) to quantify.

I can't say I agree, at least I would need some convincing that people in the US in the 1700s believed in freedom and freedom of development more so than people in the US now. The US didn't become a super power until after WWII.

>The history has proven that a society that share the common goals can advance forward. While those comprised with self-proclaimed leaders never really manage to unite any large nations.

This sounds nice, but I'm having a hard time thinking of any large modern states that appear to be driven by a shared common goal.

If such states only existed in the past, then my feeling is that is a result of romanticizing the past having not lived it. Maybe in 50 years people will look back on these last two decades as a time when large parts of the western world 'came together' with the common goal of 'fighting terrorism'.

>Otherwise we would all borrow as much as we could (about 2% and somewhat predictable) and put it all in the stock market (avg 7,5 % but volatile).

The 2% rate is that low precisely becomes it comes with collateral (the car).

Interest rates on personal loans with no collateral are closer to 10%, which is the reason people can't do what you're suggesting.

From the point of view of role of government in people's lives

My guess has always been that the difference comes about because smaller communities can organize to solve problems without government help, so they lean towards 'limited government'. Larger communities have a naturally harder time organizing, and so they lean towards government programs.

If your community is 1,000 people and 1% of your population is homeless, you probably know the names of all 10 people and figure out a solution case by case. If your community is 10,000,000... that's 100,000 homeless people, which is a wholly different problem.

ExxonMobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP are all in favor of America staying in the Paris climate agreement, and if you look at those company's websites, they all accept the prevailing scientific consensus on climate change.

The coal industry is the last holdout of the climate change skeptics. Everyone in oil and gas has seen the future and have started to push research and investments into renewables to limit their risk exposure.

>Hunh? Care to elaborate on a) what specifically AirBNB does to facilitate racism, and b) what you'd expect them to change about their 'platform' to stop people from being horrible?

They are aware of a problem with some hosts discriminating against certain guests. Here is an article describing some things they're trying to combat this in California in particular.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/04/28/airbnb-l...

The linked article describes them as a for-profit org.

> Change.org, a for-profit petition and fundraising website focused on social and political change.

They are a B-corp for what that's worth.

>If it were normal to get fired after a day or a week, you could get hired at 10 different companies over a span of two months and likely find a really great position, where you're a great fit.

That might work well for people that are unemployed, but it'll be hard to attract anyone that has a secure job with such flimsy offers.

I can't seem to edit my comment anymore. In an attempt to correct the record, I'm very wrong about my claim in at least a couple of ways.

1. I made that statement without checking my facts

2. I recalled from the news today that China had a debt to gdp ratio of about 250% (this is total debt to gdp, including debt held by consumers and corporations)

3. I compared it to a number in my head of US debt to gdp ratio being about 100% (this turns out to be about government debt to gdp).

At the very least, the thing I intended to say is wrong or an unequal comparison at best.

US debt to GDP ratio is half that of China, not claiming the trend is sustainable but that (at least according to Moody's) China is more at risk of a runaway debt-spend crisis than the US is.

No, part of the registration, for password recovery