A department chair at a university is usually not the most productive researcher, as far as I can tell. And if they are, they tend to leave the position quickly to refocus on research. As far as I've seen it is not unusual for people who are engaged with what they do to avoid admin tasks. A dynamic like that would seem to push less engaged or capable people into admin.
You can get cheap wired earphone splitters and share what you're listening to on long bus rides or flights. I miss that. Maybe one wants something between needing to be on and conversing and the isolation of separate bluetooth listening.
Having a detailed and auditable report of how money is being used is really helpful for creating the understanding you are talking about. That is what accounting is for and why it is so essential to modern life.
The site is obviously just an advertisement for a weird camera surveillance system, but the concern about incomplete accounting is very real. In many places one might want to contribute to non-profit efforts, IRS information isn't even available. In my work in Ecuador, I have seen a lot of fraud, and half-baked charities. Some rich NGOs sometimes walk in on some field trip that donors have paid for, make some statements about all they are going to do and disappear without follow-up. Basically they are just tourists on a free vacation taking publicity photos. There is a specific organization that comes down to build environmentally safe toilets. Not only are these built by young middle class volunteers that know nothing about building anything but their CVs, the communities they are helping don't even need new toilets. The building supplies tend to be repurposed after the volunteers are gone, every single year. I'd like to know if I paid for that. There are seeds of merit in the program, but also unnecessary waste.
Despite negative examples, there are many worthy things that are done, and could be done in the region. Northern money can go very far in the areas I work. It can do a lot to not just improve but transform people's lives. So you suggest that an answer to money misuse is to have personal experience with any organization you donate to. How many people who have the money are going to spend any real time in Amazonian Ecuador? They aren't there now. What is going to change? Since there are few people with money who can be personally involved, does that mean that no effort should be made to better people's lives there? Obviously, that is what accounting is for. I think the article is absolutely right about that. I find their solution to be creepy and invasive. Maybe just having better auditing and reporting standards makes more sense than pointing cameras at hospital patients, but what do I know?
Lean 4 is uses constructive logic. If a closed world assumption requires that a statement that is true is also known to be true, and that any statement that is not known to be true is therefore false, that is not true of constructive systems. I only use Rocq, but I believe the type theories in Rocq and Lean 4 are basically similar variations on the Calculus of Constructions in both cases, though there are important differences. In a constructive theory something is true if a proof can be constructed, but the lack of a proof does not entail that something is false. One needs to prove that something is false. In constructive type theory, one can say, that something is true or false.
Those are both valid reasons to use both languages. The "only" (whether true or not) is what the argument hinges on. It is roughly the same as saying that the only advantage of X is that it is popular, but Y is also popular and has additional advantages, therefore, Y is better than X. That is a valid argument, whether the premises are true or not.
It is interesting how accommodations can reveal dysfunctions in educational practice. In my courses, requests for accommodations generally change the course design for all students. This is because the accommodation does not alter expected learning outcomes, but it is clearly something that aids students with difficulty learning the material succeed. My goal is that all students succeed in the expected learning outcomes. I don't want the course to be challenging for the wrong reasons. So often the request reveals something I was doing that is unnecessary and makes the class more difficult for little reason. That isn't to say that there are not learning environment that should add additional stress. Sometimes such conditioning is needed so that one can succeed in the challenges they are being trained for. That isn't the case for my students.
It seems like the central claim of the study is that there is an increased use of center embeddings in legal texts in comparison to non-legal texts and casuals peach. I'm seeing a lot of debating and presentations of opinions about various aspects of legalese in the comments, but the number of center embeddings in a document is measurable, and is in no way associated with clarity, or precision. It is known that beyond one or two center embeddings, most people find a sentence incomprehensible. There is no way that a sentence like "The dog the cat the rat chased ate saw the man wink." is more clear than some semi-paraphrase, which does not use center embeddings, such as "The rat chased the cat who ate the dog who saw the man wink." It seems reasonable that the only explanation the researchers could find for such behavior is that it seemed to have some sociological value in invoking authority. There is no sense in which center embeddings help to avoid lexical ambiguity. They are simply difficult to parse.
I got turned off of F# because it seemed like knowing C# libraries and tooling was assumed if one wanted to do anything non-trivial, kind of like some of the functional JVM languages always assume some amount of Java knowledge and use of Java tooling. F# seemed nice, but it didn't seem like a real stand-alone language. Unlike Elm or Purescript, where one should also know JavaScript and its tooling, I don't find learning all the C# and Java stuff independently compelling enough to use F#, Scala, Frege, etc.
It is called evidentiality. It doesn't have any direct relationship to time, as one would expect with a tense. Southern Quechua has a reported event evidential affix as well. A friend who is a speaker of Quechua was once horrified, hearing that a man was going to be given a life sentence for murder in Bolivia. They played a portion of his confession over the radio, and the accused man used the reported event evidential through the entirety. Literally, saying that all his words were second hand, dubious information. To my friend, the implication was that he was saying what the police had told him to say. Apparently, those judging the case were not aware of the subtlety, and it did not come through in the Spanish translation of the confession, resulting in a conviction. Whatever the facts of the case were in the end, what is interesting is that for Quechua speakers like my friend, due to the use of the reported event evidential, there was no confession, even though all of the events of a murder were stated in the first person.
It definitely seems misleading to talk about coca leaf use as cocaine use, given the common expectation for what that means. People reading the newspaper probably don't know all these details, and it isn't spelled out. I can't imagine some guy in a club not feeling like he was robbed after paying for a powdery drug and then receiving a handful of leaves. I can't imagine an Andean woman sitting down for morning tea being pleased to have a bunch of powder dumped in her cup.
I suppose the better term would be synecdoche, since the similarity in pronunciation isn't coincidental, like "The sun rose in the morning." and "Look at the pretty rose petals." but is a form of motivated polysemy.
There is no reason why one has to enjoy a haskell-like syntax over Bourne shell syntax but I think you're wrong about the tool. The author states that "It should have no abstraction capabilities (classes, data types, polymorphic functions, etc.)." Granted, there may be types but without those abstractions, I don't think you need to know much of anything about type theory.
Maybe it is "including linguistics" but most of the world's languages don't have the data available to train on. So I think one major question for NLP is exactly the question you posed: "Is there any other paradigm that we think can enable a computer understand language other than training a large deep learning model on a lot of data?"
Toasters have been around for a long time. So has Javascript. I suppose that I can buy a modern toaster or an antique toaster. Still, they both seem unremarkably like toasters to me. Likewise, I can run an old Javascript program or a new one. It feels like being modern isn't really all that special. I wonder if no matter how old the tradition of writing software becomes, we'll always want to associate it with modernness. Will certain software writing ever become artisanal?
I feel like the art scene is where the artists go to get a drink, meet one another, and then go back to their places to collaborate. It seems like a lot of the most accessible venues are places that are not explicitly arts venues. I've seen a number of cases where artistically inclined bar tenders at dives, who have their friends come in to hang out, thus creating a scene, work to convince the artistically indifferent owners that allowing them to have shows, open mics or something more interesting than a photo of some used up sports star on the walls will draw customers. What begins as a quirky place to sing karaoke and pay bargain prices for beers are where people who build careers often begin communicating and collaborating.
That is a hard question because there are so many ways that one can understand regex. I learned how to read and use them using Unix tools like sed, but I think that my path to starting to understand them probably began with papers like "Regular Expression Matching Can Be Simple And Fast" by Russ Cox (https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html), well after feeling like I was pretty good at using them.
Then, as an expert in linguistic morphology, I started learning about things like subregular languages, as talked about in works such as Aural Pattern Recognition Experiments and the Subregular Hierarchy, by Rogers and Pullum (https://www.cs.earlham.edu/~jrogers/JoLLI.pdf). And I continue to wonder what the relationship is between these classes of languages and word formation.
I use protonvpn because I pay for protonmail. It is frustrating because I feel like I need to pay another VPN provider to get decent service. The client is ridiculously unstable and doesn't have the features found on other platforms. If you're not already using their mail services, use linux, and don't like being snubbed despite being a paying customer, look for another provider. Note that the stealth mode is not available for linux, just another way to tell their linux customers that they don't matter.
The code talkers didn't just talk in Navajo but utilized a code system based on Navajo [1]. There were also code talkers who spoke other Native American languages.
Right, these are exactly the types of claims we try to debunk in Linguistics 101. It is a horribly misleading article. If one wants to see if something about a language is difficult for human beings, I suppose one can look at the point in development that children master the concept. But even that can be misleading, since there are language internal factors that can lead children to pick up a particular aspect of grammar faster in one language than another. In English, noun-verb agreement comprehension is relatively late, but the same concept is comprehended relatively early in French, though according to one article, not necessarily in Spanish [1]. One can't simply look at a language in isolation and say it seems hard to me, so it must be universally difficult. Navajo may seem relatively easy to pick up if one already speaks an Athabaskan language.
I work with a man in the Ecuadorian Amazon who is a member of an ethnic group that reached a low of possibly only 400 individuals before a cultural change that made them more open to marriage with outsiders and healed some internal fighting that lead to many deaths.
He claims that his multiple wives and 10 children are all about bringing the numbers back up and a service to his people. I don't think anyone is fooled by this claim, least of all him. If a couple has a nice relationship, like kids and have no love of birth control, have at it, but don't pretend it is a public service.
It is a strange world we live in when there are so many big families with smart kids that would love to have a job and not mind paying taxes when they're the right age, but no one wants to let them near the places where a younger population is needed.
It is well known that due to his economic interest in enslavement of native people he did not attempt a great deal of conversion. It is discussed in La Caida de Cristóbal Colón, for instance, in chapter 7. I believe there is a general consensous that slave taking and mineral exploitation were his priorities.
It is also accepted that even if he did not intend to wipe out the Taino, he bore responsibility. His policies affected their demise beyond disease alone. It is true we will never know whether disease alone would have killed them off but that is exactly because we know that it did not. We can only speculate on what would have happened if intentional forms of violence were not in play.
It is odd to say that it is non-genocidal to kill off a population from indifference and greed. There is no ambiguity in the record that the Taino were destroyed due to policies Columbus initiated. One might kill a family while they are sleeping by setting their house on fire. They can then claim, I only wanted to destroy the house or, I only wanted to kill the father. They might justify doing so for commercial reasons, rather than a desire to make families dead. They may claim not to be a family killer. I do not see this as making the actions forgiveable or better. Likewise, exterminating a race through actions, even if one is indifferent to the outcome resulting in extermination, may not be a lawyer's version of genocide but I would say it is equally unforgiveable.
I think that in academic work this is reasonable. People sometimes claim to have done something novel, when it is clearly a repetition of something older. Perhaps the citations of the works being criticized didn't make it clear that they were repeating an old idea. It allows the reader to see that there were relevant previous works that may have been subjected to criticism in the past and that those previous criticisms remain important for the more recent work. The question then is whether the recent work resolves those criticisms. The authors in this case seem not to think so.
A better paraphrase is the following: The new idea is not so new as some claim. It is 20 years old and was previously shown to be flawed in comparison to other approaches. Looking over 40 years of literature, one can see the flaws in the approach and how the flaws were subsequently resolved. Proponents of the "new idea" are either unaware of these advancements or are ignoring them.
I'd say that ignoring previous literature and work is a big problem is CS adjacent studies. My experience is being a theoretical linguist who interfaces with computational linguists. I have had colleagues receive criticism for citing work that is 10 years old or more, even if such a work represents the earliest example of a particular idea they are making use of. It is suggested that a more modern work should be cited. There is kind of an "anti-memory" culture that results from trying to make work seem cutting edge, even if a work is clearly an extension or reinvention of very old ideas.
In Ecuador a new mac is way too expensive for most people. The availability of used ones are low. I imagine this is because people can't afford them new so they don't have any to resell. Computer literacy is such that most people don't know about linux. When I'm down there doing research and have participants using linux no one seems confused by it. I think for most people I meet, it is just a question of having linux already on the computer. Everyone pirates the os so the quetion of paying never comes up. As far as I can tell, this is pretty typical in a number of Latin American countries and probably common in most of the world where macs are luxury items.
It works with DuckDuckGo as well. I like the privacy focus of DuckDuckGo but it doesn't seem much better than Google when it comes to promoting garbage sites like slant.co over information written by a well informed human being.
This is why the British and people in the US do not act the same. The British have their behaviour while us Americans have our behavior. Totally different.