hos234

Amazon pulls in thousands of unpaid reviews for any product. Now what do you do? Give all of them the product free?

Lets say 3 in 100 reviews are good. And you want those 3 to come back and review the next product. You are even willing to pay them something. Is there a guarantee that they have interest and will show up, and if they do, is there a guarantee that they produce a useful review of the same standard the second time around?

Thats just one simplified reason about the dynamics of this process, that is going to block everyone from getting things for free.

Its easy to react, to push to dismantle it and you just end up with YouTube style mega mass of comments under every vid where the best comments are guaranteed to get buried unless they pander to the will of the herd.

Here's a difference view - https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10464

And Twitter themselves are talking out being "excited" about the emergence of "social intelligence" - https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/insights/2019/the-stat...

I hope the internal resistance gets more organized and tactical. Cause this story is not ending any time soon given the number of issues involved.

In any large org, its well known which execs up the food chain exist to play empire defense and which ones can cause real change. Both sides will have their own entrenched networks of support. Understanding those networks is critical to getting change through. Applying pressure without mapping and understanding internal org politics is how people end up getting fired in large orgs.

Googlers basically have to use their Profiling and Targeting expertise on their own org chart to weaken the status quoists and identify/strengthen those who can make change happen. Just getting your stories in the press is not going to do shit.

Cheney and crew not only leaked stuff. They misused it to justify a pointless war that has had a high cost - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_aluminum_tubes

But the way the law works is they get to retire in peace.

yup thanks changed

Society doesn't need everyone broadcasting.

Just like the brain doesn't need every neuron broadcasting its state to every other neuron.

That's the fundamental flaw of Social Media and Media in general - Many to Many Broadcast - is not as useful to society as thought.

And we are learning it at high cost.

I am still a fan of Googles OpenRefine tool. It's reconciliation feature that helps disambiguate Named Entities etc based on wikidata is really powerful - https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/wiki/Reconciliation

You can hook in your own reconciliation end point which we do at work to expand internal knowledge graphs.

Well I have heard narratives about white kids in poorer neighborhoods not applying for that gas station/fast food job because they see it as something that the immigrants do. And then getting stuck in a poverty trap leading to crime.

The solutions to that from conservatives is obviously reduce immigration. Progressives need to think about how these kind of dynamics can be changed.

If you come across, and have to deal with a Sickles day to day - maybe as a boss or colleague or employee or in social circles - what would you do? Does anyone have any good strategies?

Herbert Simon is who you read first when you thinking about orgs - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satisficing

That will take to you to healthy and productive places.

Well you guys better protect that system cause where I live it's like a factory assembly line with well programmed robots herding people through without too much thought to long term outcomes.

I have had good experiences only after putting in a lot of research (that too after some painful lessons). And thats an option if it's not an emergency.

I have had to deal with a couple emergencies over the last couple years, where decisions had to be taken quickly. And I have seen both good and bad outcomes. The bad outcomes almost always are some guy at the ER acting as if palliative care is some unimaginable option.

They frame it simplistically "We have to move patient to the OR or they will be dead in X hours/by tomorrow etc". Just because it's possible to operate doesn't mean a surgery has to happen. Especially on elderly people.

It creates all kinds of cascading problems if it's a bad call. Good outcomes are possible but it needs a certain personality type and experience.

Totally agree.

Most surgeons are mindless robots. So immersed in their craft, full of themselves and disconnected from the rest of the population that they don't pause to think too much about what they are doing.

Not unlike any other profession with hyper specialization. It takes other members of the team or group to reign them in.

The job involves a whole lot of decision making surrounding ambiguity and uncertainty, and there are certain personality types who are totally unfit to handle such decisions. They get pushed into the room because of other skills and mindlessly do what they are programmed too.

Few months back I saw one jackass more interested in showing a family video clips taken of the surgery on their 80 year old mother, than actually talking about what they had achieved through the 8 hour reconstruction of all her internals. She passed away a few weeks back after all that pointlessness.

After many bad experiences with family and friends, I always ask the specialist how many such ops the team has done in a year. And then, how many have long term positive outcomes. And then, if they can put me in touch with someone who has been through it a few years prior. These days its easy to dig up this information.

I think larger the population, larger the hyperconnection less interesting/impactful is individual intelligence and creativity. What will overshadow individuals is what the group intelligence/creativity produces.

There are no Van Gogh's anymore just Pixar.

I would like a left vote/right vote.

Would be interesting to see the posts where both counts cancel under a Header of Neutral (non polarizing) content.

Similarly content(posts AND comments) getting "high" left and right counts can be sent off under separate Headers for the respective fan clubs to feast on.

Have you thought of Teaching? You could contact schools and orgs that run training/workshops etc and see what full time/part time options are available that suit you. Some of them might have experience with this stuff and might point you in the right direction eg - https://www.inclusionfilms.com

"Impactful" individuals are those that impact society "e.g., full professors at research-intensive universities, Fortune 500 executives, distinguished judges and lawyers, leaders in biomedicine, award-winning journalists and writers".

"stealth wealth" is not impact.

Thanks for these writeups. This is a very inspiring project.

hmm...this 4 Billion queries number comes from where?

Looking at Stackexchange most of the sites have less than a million (possible?) queries(questions). Stackoverflow, probably the largest, has 18 million questions. Wikipedia article count is about 5 million.

Is the assumption that people are coming up with 1000 different ways to query every possible result endpoint?

The barriers are all in the mind.

The simplest way to upgrade skills is to work with teams working on problems of interest to you, where you have to meet up with them, atleast once a week if not more. The social aspect is what drives learning.

Doesn't matter if you are working full time. Find a subject that interests you THEN find/contact research labs/profs/startups working on it. Tell them you have X hours a week (for 3 or 6 months) you want to devote to it and ask them for an assignment. If you have more experience and skill than the avg grad student they employ, it's easy to find a project.

I have done this with incubators, univ labs and research labs close to me. I am luckily in a large city, where once you start looking, you will find all kinds of interesting characters doing interesting things. Follow their blogs, twitter feeds and github repos. Identify where you want to contribute. Make a small bug fix or document some aspect of their code and the door opens.

What is not conveyed here is what You need.

Yup looks like I jumped the gun there. I was looking at mobility group opex - 41 billion (150 million subscribers). Assumed rest was content (hbo/warner/turner etc). They have a header called "entertainment group" opex - 36 which I assumed was content. Digging deeper "entertainment group" was actually cable and satellite.

I would because they are spending barely 40 of that on telco. Most of it is being spent on their content play to capture "premium" customers i.e. not the 163 million Microsoft claims don't have basic broadband speed internet access. Might as well just divide the country and be done with it, if you are quite happy with the direction Big Telco will take us.

Now go and sum up the gross profits of AT&T, Verizon and Comcast and let us know what they are doing with it.

Interesting. Why did the streaks start only at the middle of the vid?

Nature shows us how to process information at ever increasing noise and scale - https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10464

"Behind the cool mask lay a high-strung disposition; Canaris was agitated and tormented by fear after each passing danger yet was still addicted to new adventures. Like most cunning people, he hated violence. He was nimble in the face of danger, witty, and sardonic. During one of his trips to Spain he would spring to attention in his open car and raise his arm in the Hitler salute every time he drove past a herd of sheep. You never know, he said, whether one of the party bigwigs might be in the crowd. Some observers have deduced from all the incongruities in Canaris that he was an unprincipled cynic who sought only thrills from the resistance and who admired Hitler as an even greater gamesman than himself. These interpretations miss the mark. In his last years Canaris increasingly suffered from the conviction that he had served Hitler far too long and far too submissively, and he regretted not having turned his resources against the regime in a more determined fashion. It has been said that he was a master of the art of obfuscation, and his skill has tended to obscure his rigid adherence to a number of principles. He could not abide treason whatever the pretext, as his break with Oster shows, but neither could he bear the lack of basic humanity that made the Nazi regime so abhorrent in his eyes"

"but when you have billion user products, some people are always going to be pissed at you"

The problem with this narrative (which has been the official line for almost 7-8 years now) is it doesn't cause exaptation or adaptation. It is good enough to hold on to, if the goal is stagnation (which is what has happened with Search - you can point at things like wolframalpha, alpha go, stackexchange, quora, wikipedia, elasticsearch etc etc and ask why if the goal was to organize the worlds info, these things failed to develop internally - Similarly with Youtube - why did they missed being netflix or twitch, how did they not become the default platform for disney). The answer is the Scale has worked against that goal. So you stagnate.

The initial goal was to scale globally. That goal was achieved. After that new goals had to be defined. That did not happen because its hard to define achievable goals at that scale. The only default goal was empire defense - i.e. hold on to scale by hook or crook. For what? Well no great answer to that has been found. Which is hinting that global scale is counter productive to innovation whether technical or moral.

Its kind of like a football team winning the game and then staying on the pitch. Not playing any new games or restarting play. Then saying but guys we won leave us alone now.

I don't blame Google. But I expect Google to lead not to react and be defensive. And to do that the narrative requires honesty.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. He is not qualified to be in the room. The problem when people like him with a big chequebook show up, is the majority of "experts" will just pander to get the cheque which has many unintended consequences. Fact of life.

Mark Zuckerberg is too full of himself. Not only does he have a track record of not having an imagination, he seems to have got it into his head, that if he reads two books on Economics and Sociology over the summer he needs to be at the policy making table. WTF seriously? I have no idea why he is being entertained. Hand the cash over to experts and fuck off.

Or just buy/lobby govts to make Internet free in the sense that roads are.

Once individual consumers hit "peak data" consumable, which despite all the hoopla about phones/IoT devices everywhere streaming in 8k 24x7, has probably already happened (upper limit being the brains input bandwidth), there is no great reason for anyone to invest in ISP's esp looking forward 10-20 years. Kind of like Walmart or Amazon thinking they need to buy highways to keep their addicts supplied.