What I love most is that Hannah Fry didn't get into the Cambridge undergraduate(?) math program (maths programme for you Brits) but became a math professor at Cambridge. Go Hannah!
113 karma · joined February 8, 2017
My indoor-outdoor cat only catches small animals if they run between her paws. But she did chase a rather large raccoon around the house once, as I did.
In my suburban neighborhood, we occasionally have coyotes. They are known to prey on fat cats (the feline kind).
My feeling is that predation by domesticated outdoor cats is overblown.
I also feel that small wild cats were likely native everywhere. Birds were probably not their primary prey; small reptiles and mammals, i.e. animals that don't fly, nest in trees, or live in flocks.
Advances have demonstrated... The NLLB part is an adjectival(sic) phrase that modifies the noun "Advances".
Hopefully I'm not wrong...
No true. All that is required is for incentives to be roughly aligned for people to tend in a similar direction.
I know there is a long history of companies buying another company for a product and then killing it after a period of time. I'm willing to give Instabridge the benefit of doubt... for a while. If they do decide that Nova Launcher is not a fit, I hope they open source it so that current users are not left on the lurch.
Regardless, I think it's important to be consistent: If you deny benefits to others, then don't accept them yourself.
Maine, Vermont, Iowa all havae higher total tax burdens than California. New York, however is #1. On the other hand, New York City is THE place to be to find fame and fortune in any number of professions. Finance, the arts, fashion all come to mind immediately.
Immanuel Kant (I paraphrase liberally) said the Golden Rule was not enough to decide if an action was ethical or not. One also had to answer in a positive way the question, "What would happen if everyone behaved this way?" So, Sam Altman, what if everyone lived by your 13 lessons?
There is not a shred of humanity here. It's all about money, money, and more money. Think about what the world would be like if everyone, and I mean everyone, only valued money. (Ironically, money in and of itself has no value.) I don't think cutthroat would begin to describe that world.
Interestingly, native Americans disparaged Europeans because they were addicted to money. For native Americans, time spent with friends and family was more important than money. Almost all the native Americans who went to Europe returned to native America, and likewise the Europeans who had once lived among native Americans, then went back to Europe, returned to native America.
Colin Shaw said, "Every generation has something they regret. The generation before me was smoking. My generation is obesity. I worry that this generation is about the lack of social interaction and having your head down at a screen rather than talking." I think he's wrong: it's artificial intelligence that we will regret.
Personally, I don't care one way or the other. I don't expect to live much beyond a decade. I do feel immensely sorry for my kids, though, and I do hope the world will hold Sam Altman personally responsible for the harm I think he has unleashed.
The AI revolution is not going to end well, starting with the AI-powered hatred that will be spewed before the 2024 election and then continuing with AI-powered monitoring of every microsecond of a person's life. 1984 will be paradise by comparison.
All that might be true, but, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra (unlikely; Niels Bohr is more likely).
\end{rant}
Just today I failed to find an example of mounting multiple drives as one Btrfs filesystem. Plenty of how to create Btrfs filesystem examples. But how to mount them? Crickets. I eventually figured it out, but at a large cost in time.
Another source described the ordinary gravitational waves as "deafening", so the rogue gravitational waves should be even louder.
WFM, YMMV
Even more problematic is: What about data stored on disk, for example, and in memory? That's two copies. Is that allowed? If so, how does that meet the requirement of "no copies allowed"?
I was taught high school "new math" from an English (O-level?) text that started with sets and was not divided into algebra, trig, geometry, etc. but provided an integrated approach that covered topics as they naturally arose. My teacher (Eric Turner, now deceased, so I was unable to let him know how much he affected my life) probably had much to do with it. He also taught physics, so perhaps he really understood both the abstract and the practical.
I have two only complaints about my mathematics education: the knowledge of how to construct and deconstruct proofs, and no statistics (too much calculus).
My kids, 17 and 15, don't grok mathematics the way I think they should. Tis a pity since underneath it all is mathematics.
By the way, there are some really excellent mathematics video channels on YouTube: 3 Blue 1 Brown comes to mind.
1. Read the assigned material before class. 2. Attend the lecture and any recitations; listen and take notes. 3. Do the homework.
Note that the material is read, heard, written, and used. It worked so well (for me) that I basically didn't have to study for finals.
A lecture or a book by itself is useless, but when used in combination with other forms of learning, can be powerful.
I agree with the comment that constructivism and transmission is a false dichotomy. We use both all the time, together.
The cited study (https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12563; sci-hub.tw has a copy) has some methodological flaws:
* The cat studied were were not randomly selected; they were chosen by "local volunteers". There may be confounding variables that explain part of the effect and so turn the observed effects from being statistically significant to not being statistically significant.
* The data on kills was self-reported, allowing bias to creep in.
* All the cats were English-speaking.
* Only 10 un-neutered pet cats were studied. I don't know if being neutered would increase, decrease, or have no effect on the kill rate, but the subject is not discussed.
I also question the conclusion that cats have a significant impact on local fauna.
* The average kill rate for a pet cat was (roughly) less than two animals per week, which doesn't seem very high. I'm left with the feeling that the authors had to resort to killings/area to make the results impressive.
* The authors did not report on the total size of the home ranges of cats compared to total area. So, for example, if the ratio was 1:1000, then so what? If the ratio was 1:20, then house cat might have a significant affect on local fauna.
Finally, I have a question about the presentation of the data: Figure 2b does not indicate that "75% of cats spent 90% of their time in disturbed habitats". The graph indicates that 500+ (out of 875 cats) spent between 95% and 100% of their time in developed habitats. Perhaps the y-axis is mislabeled, but even if it is, the graph does not match what the authors say.