It's an easy way to divide population and make them fight internally. This tactic is very effective, because if other ones would put focus on law creators, a division of population makes it so people, at least large part, assign blame for injustice to the other side of the division. In this case, the attack on population is two-fold - on one hand you have women that you convince are unjustly paid lower than men doing "same" job, on the other hand you create perceived injustice on men side, where men work hard both at actual work and at negotiations for salary in companies like google, and then they see women getting same as them without putting any effort in negotiation. Or even worse - they see their salaries sliced to match those of women who didn't negotiate/didn't commit enough to their job.
With attack like this it's hard to see the actual responsible entity, the top some percent of population by wealth, whom are actually benefiting from these laws. They win in any way - if women don't get paid the same in the end, they create tension between genders, that misdirects attention from their excessive wealth, and if women get paid same, it means they can pay men lower, also creating tension from men side.
He was absolutely out of touch. At no point he ever considered the basic human, as an animal species, instincts, tendencies, mechanisms and other mechanics surrounding human societies. His idea of society is an equivalent of designing an everlasting engine with assumptions like friction, radiation, air resistance and evaporation doesn't exist. He discarded reality, created his own reality in his own mind and pushed an idea as worthy of some kind of significance.
The only thing that this man taught me is how far you can get just by being super persuasive.
This time will go in history as "the dark ages of human genetics" because of this reason. Some groups of humans are smarter than other groups of humans, some are more athletic, there are many physical and behavioral differences caused by genes in different easily identifiable groups of people. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it, but because of the toxic political environment, everyone must pretend these differences either don't exist, or they exist because of some magical politically correct reason like socioeconomic status. Even ignoring that the status itself has genetic influence and thus members of one easily identifiable group of people are predisposed to higher/lower status than other.
We are doing nothing but fooling ourselves by pretending we are all equal.
So far intelligence don't seem to be as one-sidedly positive trait as it seems for most here. With increased intelligence comes increased risk factors of many diseases like depression, anxiety, bipolar, and many others. That means that less intelligent people have actually more reliable brain health than more intelligent. So unless this problem is solved, simply adding the genes that, among other things, increase IQ, can backfire in unforeseen ways.
Another thing is more intelligent people are predisposed to be less reproductive. In this way lesser intelligence is a balancing force for mental health and survival of species.
But following your logic, power plants should charge depending on what you use your electricity for, water company should charge depending on where you put your water, grocery stores should charge depending on what (they think) you do with the food, etc. Net neutrality is a slippery slope to total corporate control of every aspect of life, internet being just the beginning. This is a wet dream of all the shareholders of all ISPs and all other service providers. Non-neutral web is against everyone's interest, even if it would boost the profit margin of some ISPs in short term.
Why should I pay twice for your app? If an app is IP, then I bought it and am supposed to use it where I want. If you charge for devices separately, means you are not selling IP, you are selling bits, of which there is infinite supply. At the point you sold an app second time to the user, he realizes that the app is just bits that he can copy himself for free.
>[...] a journal of molecular biology asked, “…if we stop looking for models and hypotheses, are we still really doing science?”
>Advances in computer software, [...] are enabling computers [...] to start without models — rule sets that express how the elements of a system affect one another — but to generate their own, [...]
Scientific method is very similar - first you observe a thing, you make internal model of it, then you observe a thing in different situations (experiment) and verify if the thing behaves like you predicted.
The difference though, and the reason why I partly agree that machine learning is not rigorous science, is that instead of having a theory that everyone can learn, you have an entity that knows the behavior, but can't communicate how he knows it.
Problem with current machine learning that the algorithms learn things the same way we learn how to walk. We learn from trial and error until we get very good at it, but at no point we can ever explain why we move one muscle or the other, even more, we can't consciously even tell that we are moving a muscle at all.
Once we have built a system that analyzes it's own internal model, like humans do, then we will be making a science that is actual science.
Funny thing is that I'm neither ideological, nor ranty or political about it. But if pointing out the obvious gets me a ban here than I will gladly take it. Wouldn't want to participate in any anti intellectual forum where everyone pretends politics and propaganda doesn't exist anyway.
If you don't like politics as much as you claim you do, such stories wouldn't be allowed here. This is not hacker related, not news and not tech related in any way. The only purpose of this story is to improve image of muslims. It doesn't even matter if this is real or not - the fact that it is published is what matters , clearly showing intent. And the fact that you leave the story up while removing harmless comment which was just a hint that the article is likely political, means you, and probably HN in itself, is willingly participating in the propaganda.
I knew HN was overwhelmingly pro muslim, but I had some hope you would at least stay away from actual political propaganda. Good luck on your censor job. HN won't be missed.
I think it's hard to "leave politics out" when the article is written specifically because he was muslim. If he was christian nobody would care. This is pro-muslim propaganda, and it's hard to "leave politics out" when discussing propaganda.
At the point where merge is possible, human + machine will probably already be inferior to machine only, in other words human would only make machine worse. Or at the very best, the human+machine period will last for very short time.
Example is chess - there was a brief moment, where human using computer would outperform computer alone. That moment passed and that's it, humans can only weaken AI.
> I get easily bored with the mundane day to day tasks in the <job> i'm forced to <do>.
This can be said about 99% of all the jobs ever. You don't get paid to have fun. There's this weird expectation in software development community that you can find a job that is fun/interesting/intellectually engaging AND well paid. Guess what - big part of your compensation is specifically because the job is BORING and nobody is willing to do it.
> those three statements encapsulate the entire source code required to perform a sort.
It is calling the resolver system though and all the accompanying functions that actually do the sorting.
Not sure what is your definition of "source code", but I'm pretty sure nobody counts external library function implementations as source code for the program. Same as you don't count OS kernel as part of your program's source code.
What about it? Any collection of rocks put on a grid with certain rules can become "conscious". Neither your little awareness of yourself, nor someones feeling of "endlessly strange" things mean anything when talking about whether universe is holographic or not.
Nobody wants to watch a show with mundane, uninspired, boring everyday characters, that have nothing special about them. OP needs to learn about tropes and character design before criticizing, because he clearly can see only his point of view.