The replication rate of Economics as a field is higher than replication rates for psychology, cancer research, pharmaceutical research, and many other fields. When was the last time you opened an econ journal?
It's a good thing that the two are separate. You really want good scientific advances to be put in textbooks, and the rest should be left for history books. You really don't want to have the scientific debate get muddled in pointless historical fights like in heterodox economics where people are still debating what mArX rEaLlY mEaNt centuries later. Scientists should read textbooks that reflect the current state of the art, not 40 years old papers that will necessarily be flawed.
The goal of DRM is and always have been to lock users inside a platform, not to prevent piracy. It gives companies market power because users cannot easily switch to a better alternative without losing their entire digital collection.
> DRM is not about limiting copyright infringement. Such an argument attempts to make DRM appear beneficial to authors and is based entirely on a (very successfully advertised) misrepresentation of DRM's purpose. To illustrate the absurdity of the argument, consider the nature of file sharing: to obtain a copy of a file without permission, downloaders go to a friend or a file sharing network, not a DRM-encumbered distribution platform. If DRM existed only to prevent unauthorized sharing, every distribution method for that particular piece of media would have to be distributed by an uncrackable DRM-encumbered distribution platform, which is impossible on its own. So long as one copy becomes available without DRM, countless more are easily produced. Industry proponents of DRM are well aware that DRM is not a copyright enforcement mechanism. DRM is only marketed as a copyright enforcement mechanism to mislead authors into tolerating and even defending it.
No, not according to the Open Source Definition of the OSI, which is generally recognized to be the authority in terms of what we call "open source".
> No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
I didn't say that it was a developing country, I listed, as the parent commenter said, "aspects in which the US is far closer to today's developing and third world countries than to the Western average".
Yeah, the "few aspects" like the prison system, healthcare, inequality, corruption, homelessness rates, freedom of the press, air pollution, crime rates, discrimination, police violence, homicide rates, unemployment benefits, social nets...
> machine learning model to make major decisions off of
I have basically no experience with ML, but from what I know I'm having difficulty understanding how it's different from OLS with constructed regressors. Can anyone explain?
Because people used to be able to use whatever IRC client they wanted for Slack, so it wasn't a problem if they were too memory constrained. In a pure embrace, extend, extinguish fashion, Slack closed the gateway that made them popular and now everyone is stuck with their pile of crap app.