mmierz

This is answered in the article!

“Conservative” here is being used to mean “marked by moderation or caution”, rather than the set of political positions called conservatism.

The poster is saying that global climate change is probably even worse than people think. Often, the reporting around climate change focuses on the best case, the average case, or what could be achieved with an immediate strong response. But the actual paths we are on seems to track some of the worse, more pessimistic cases.

>The proposed solution isn’t optimal but it works. Not sure what you think is wrong with it?

Consider the input “ba”

This solution will return “ab”, which is not a strong that can be generated by deleting characters from the input.

That solution as written is O(n^3)

This is not an easy problem.

It’s not external muscle control, that’s not what a TENS unit does. OP is describing using painful electric shocks to punish a worker for mistakes or for going off-task, i.e. brutalize workers into performing with machine like efficiency.

I believe it is intended to mean "strategic advice from someone perceived as a social peer", meaning a high level important executive person, not a junior analyst.

Historically, labor unions.

I see people trot it out in online arguments as an excuse, or in think-pieces as a justification. But if white male identity politics is very important to someone, important enough to find common cause with literal neo-nazis, I think their conversion already happened.

Author appears to be a cell biologist, where this is not atypical. There are very few permanent jobs, there are hundreds of applicants for every one, and the hiring committees would generally rather not hire anyone than accept less than the very top applicants.

Author would surely have been well served by leaving science sooner. As another commenter noted, his output wasn't impressive, and it should have been obvious he would never be hired as an independent researcher. But that can be psychologically difficult for a 40-year-old whose project of becoming an independent scientist started when he was literally a teenager.

My parents did something like this. My near-total isolation prior to college resulted in terrible social skills. I hurt a lot of people and experienced crushing loneliness. In my 30s, I'm starting to feel like I can pass as a "normal" person and have human relationships.

On the plus side I do still know a tremendous amount of trivia about topics that I was interested in as a child, I'm not particularly interested in following rules, and I'm not afraid to be alone or to learn things from a book without anyone to help. These qualities have served me in good stead.

On the balance, I'm not sure I would change anything, but you should be aware of what your kids might be in for.

That's the stereotype, but it's not clear that it's actually true [1]

1. http://theconversation.com/anti-vaccination-beliefs-dont-fol...

at US universities, it's more like 1.5X the workload or less. There are typically large numbers of general or elective course requirements that can satisfy requirements for 2 or more degrees simultaneously.

"general intelligence". the characteristic that IQ is intended to correlate with.

Cary, NC

Adding onto this, I saw a very interesting seminar a few years ago from a biologist who sequenced bacterial samples from the arctic permafrost. He found resistance genes for antibiotics that had definitely not been created by humans at the time that the samples were deposited.

So "new" antibiotics aren't actually new, and resistance to them probably already exists somewhere -- bacteria have been fighting this war for as long as there have been bacteria.

I agree. I started developing adult friendships when I decided not to worry about this and start dropping “strong hints” that I was interested in social events that I overheard people discussing.

I tend to appear standoffish and several friends have told me that they initially believed that I disliked them. I have to tell people explicitly that I am interested in spending time with them to overcome this.

It doesn’t help “nobody”. It helps people that build yachts. And then the people who sell things to the people that build yachts. And on, and on.

Working people spend their money.

> I've often felt like science in particular would benefit from a sort of embargo period, during which time pseudonymous authorship would be obligatory, and after which researchers could collect their due credit. Too much focus is given to "rockstar" PIs and their labs rather than the substance of their findings.

I don't think this would work because pre-publication work is usually not a secret, it gets promoted at conferences and seminars well before it's formally published.

Did you read the article in the post you're replying to? I don't think "herd mentality" is what the US far-right rejects.

>men with severe obesity have only one chance in 1,290 of reaching the normal weight range within a year

Based on my personal experiences, a pool of anecdotes from friends, and the generally accepted advice of the medical community: sustained weight loss of more than 1 lb per week is incredibly difficult and not realistic for most dieters.

Since, by definition, most "severely obese" people are more than 52lb from a "healthy" weight, statistics like this seem inevitable even if the person does everything perfectly and achieves results that they're satisfied with.

Example: I've totally transformed my body with diet and exercise. But I've failed by this metric, because it took longer than a year, and I'm significantly heavier now than at my lowest weight (albeit much more muscular)

I can't comment on BBC, but I can't remember the last time I watched something on netflix or amazon that had missing subtitles.

Please no. Papers are sufficiently terse, jargon-filled and hard to follow as it is

Because of the 10% they keep, which can still be a huge sum.

I disagree that corporations are more powerful than nations, because FB and google can't compel you to do anything.

If I opt out of google, then I miss out on google's services. If I "opt out" of my country's laws, I go to prison.

Google censorship only controls what people say on google. Government censorship can control what their citizens say anywhere.

Any forum that doesn't censor at least some content is abused until it either starts censoring or becomes unusable.

The key difference is that you're allowed to make your own platform and set whatever rules you like

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't know any ML researchers that don't know about probability, but maybe they exist somewhere. Machine learning research isn't a good model for "data science" writ large.

Maybe there are some jobs and some problem spaces where you can just tweak big black box models and you don't ever need to think about what their output means. But if you're the kind of data scientist who helps make decisions with data -- you better believe statistics and probability is conceptually relevant. As soon as models meet the real world, you've got to understand probability in order to know what to expect.

I think it's a dumb name for what I do so I call myself a programmer if anyone asks.

I think it's more like not hiring a big name coding competition winner because they never bothered to learn how to use version control, or any coding best practice, or any language other than C.

Trying to do data science with zero knowledge of the fundamentals of probability is dangerous. Bayes rule isn't some kind of deep magic, it's covered within the first few lectures of an undergraduate probability course and it's absolutely necessary to understand the output of any machine learning model.

The usual way is to kill them with heat when the fish is cooked

Looks useful, I will try this out.

In the examples, some of the plots (such as the classifier factory ROC curve) generate many curves, but this is not explained -- is it one curve per cross-validation split?