HN user
The two aren't mutually exclusive. You can both invest in yourself, while investing in other opportunities. The problem is how to allocate your resources optimally.
Having early access to motivated and talented programmers that may have a good idea for a disruptive product or technology seems like a potential advantage for a venture fund.
Particularly if those seeking funding are also seeking training and career advice.
From the project README:
How bootstrapped works tldr - Percentile based confidence intervals based on bootstrap re-sampling with replacement.
---
MIT OCW 18.05 has this to say about the technique:
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-05-introduction-t...
The bootstrap percentile method is appealing due to its simplicity. However it depends on the bootstrap distribution of mean(x') based on a particular sample being a good approximation to the true distribution of mean(x). Rice says of the percentile method, “Although this direct equation of quantiles of the bootstrap sampling distribution with confidence limits may seem initially appealing, it’s rationale is somewhat obscure.”
In short, don’t use it.
Use the empirical bootstrap instead (we have explained both in the hopes that you won’t confuse the empirical bootstrap for the percentile bootstrap).
---
Updated to reflect suggestions in comments below.
It's not procrastination - it's just lazy evaluation.
Unbreakable crypto is a genie long out of the bottle.
No amount of wishing, legislating, or fear-mongering is going to prevent terrorist organizations from implementing these well-described, mathematically sound, publicly available algorithms.
Since we cannot prevent terrorists from using crypto, the only ones without crypto will be non-terrorists.
This proposal only serves to enshrine within the government the chilling capability and authority to surveil its citizens.
There is an iPad version.
This is great. I started watching pretty late into the stream, though. Will the videos be archived and available after the event?
Yes. We can generally all agree that ISPs in the United States are effectively monopolists with no incentive to do what's right for their customers.
Now, let's talk solutions.
Or you could pay an additional $5/month for a decent VPN. In fact, I have a number of close contacts who work in the industry who tell me that this type of practice is of heavy interest and routine on the wireless end of things. Companies are tracking not just your browsing habits but your location data based on cell tower triangulation.
This is why we need to decentralize the ISPs and move to local mesh networks.
I suspect this is a distraction to direct the public's attention away from PRISM and the NSA controversy.
The article slams Alito, but the judgment was 5-4. Whenever rulings are this close, it suggests that there are nuances and rationale arguments on both sides.
As disconcerting as this ruling is, there is likely more to this than the headline. For example, it seems that one's 5th ammendment right against self-incrimination is preserved in this ruling so long as one verbally invokes it, i.e., "I plead the fifth".
No, it's not ideal, and it gives a great deal of power to law enforcement, which will sometimes be wielded irresponsibly. But, destroyed? - that's a bit hyperbolic.
Completely agreed - plaigiarism is rampant because collaboration is so natural and doing work for its own sake does nothing to advance one's understanding of the material.
All subjects, to the greatest extent possible, should be heavily based on collaborative projects that give back to society. Demonstrate your knowledge by contributing original research and ideas to Wikipedia. Contribute to an open source project on github using algorithms and methods you've learned in the classroom.
Society should benefit from the education system, not just through run-of-the-mill degree programs, but from the fruits of the labors of its students.
There is so much untapped potential.
Using Bitcoin is like paying for goods with shares of company stock... stock that can be broken down into almost arbitrarily small subunits... and which are immune to SEC regulation.
There's nothing wrong with the bitcoin economy - it's just very different than anything that's ever existed before. If it were just like fiat money, there'd be little use for it and no economy to speak of.
Now worries - I didn't mean to sound argumentative and I agree with you that in the short run bubbles form. ^_^
Though, I would say freedom is not just _hard_ to control - it's impossible by definition. Freedom is not a short term thing, it's a long term outcome - it's the low energy state that's thermodynamically favored. Eventually the world will be a truly efficient, democratic, free society. But, it takes time and catalysis to get there.
Bitcoin is a catalyst for freedom. It or something like it will be adopted.
My gut tells me bitcoins are here to stay.
Is freedom a bubble? There is tremendous value in freedom. Bitcoin provides this in abundance. Like P2P filesharing, no amount of legislation and regulation will wrest control of it back into the hands of the government and financial institutions - it will only continue to be embraced as public awareness grows.
It's not a bubble, it's a snowball - at least in the long run.
Agreed, caps here to highlight the change.
This:
On October 28th, the Library of Congress decided to not renew an exemption for carrier unlocking cell phones*
Should be changed as follows:
"decided to not renew" => "decided NOT to renew" =(or)=> "FAILED to renew"
at first glance, I misread it as "decided to renew".
Also, "Library of Congress" should be changed to "Librarian of Congress"
Of course, students have no reason to report deaths of relatives when there are no consequences to missing class. So, deaths most likely only get reported during exams.
This should be simulcast to an MIT auditorium.
Please excuse the bluntness, but neither of the two things you mentioned (using smartphones and downloading illegal copies of movies) have anything to do with Kim Dotcom or his new startup, Mega.
Your comment is therefore neither particularly relevant, nor does it contribute to the discussion.
Ortiz will answer for her actions, perhaps not as a matter of law, but certainly as a matter of common sense and decency.
No one should be exempt from behaving like a decent human being, and one does not need to break the law in order to be fired for executing poor judgment.
What's wrong with algorithms?
"Cops use Taser on (+Unarmed) Uncooperative Woman (+Holding a Video Camera)"
- Fixed that for you.
Now:
Why a taser?
Couldn't they just slap her in handcuffs and escort her out of the store?
Tasers are supposed to be substituted for lethal force when no other options exist. If they had no tasers, would they have shot her instead?
Bad form for the taser alone. But, shear stupidity to use it when being recorded on video, unless absolutely necessary.
That's what clinical trials and FDA approval is for (at least in theory).
Just to clarify:
The previous link I posted was not the one referenced in the Science Daily. That would be here:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/emmm.201200245
Unfortunately, all of these original articles are behind a paywall. Most of us here have some University access, I believe, but not all. Science Daily at leasts gets you the gist.
Blasco also published in Rejuvenation Research last year about a dietary supplement that activates telomerase. So, that + this makes for some interesting reading.
Unbeholden - it says we don't take shit from anyone
Here's the strawpoll version (live results, quantitative option):
Great idea for a tumblog!
It's not cheating: it's collaboration. The old models of academic integrity just don't make sense in the digital age.
Don't pit students against one another - make them work cooperatively. Don't give grades, assign projects that translate into real world skills and fill real world needs immediately. Let students learn and work by contributing to society.
Students shouldn't graduate with diplomas. They should graduate with resumes and experience.
We shouldn't compete, we should work cooperatively.
What year is this anyway?
I would argue this public outcry should have been predicted and is not the kind of sentiment AT&T should be seeking from their customers.
They should be adding value to their existing services and getting customers to pay for that added value, not trying to find ways to charge their customers more for their existing service.
Apple releases new hardware on a regular schedule - never once has the price increased for a newer model of the hardware. With Apple, the quality only gets better as the price gets cheaper. With AT&T, every contract not only comes with a price hike, but with more restrictions.
I want to love AT&T - they were the first to carry the iPhone and they employ more than a few of my family members. But, under current leadership, I vote no confidence and have serious reservations about locking myself into 2 more years of these shenanigans.