The new thing to do is put employees on a contract agreement for 30 days such that even IF you complete the ridiculous interview gauntlet, you are still a "tentative" employee and have to prove yourself. I did this for a YC company this spring and it was awful.
By asking this question, I assume you are being sarcastic and indirectly suggesting that legislation or other means of enforcing AI safety is impossible because it would refer to matrix multiplication and gradient descent and therefore be unreasonably broad, ruling out many harmless computations. However, it's unlikely that legislation or other enforcement would operate at that level of description, in the same way that laws regarding murder do not reference patterns of motor-neuron activation. It is reasonable to prevent certain certain classes of multiplication and gradient descent without doing so generically by using a more abstract level of description.
Reading a variety of garbage that doesn't share their sources or even provide a ledger for what their data means isn't going to give you good conclusions. Including any of those outlets is a mistake.
Everything is relative. In my social circles virtually no one watches broadcast or cable TV any more. The ad industry relies on Neilsen ratings to say everything is wonderful in the world of passive consumption, but do you trust their stats?
http://www.pajiba.com/think_pieces/ineffective-nielsen-ratin...
Your dismissive idea about not bothering to 'read a variety of garbage' implies you will only read rubber stamped, verified information. The question there, as we all seek versions of the truth, is who is doing the verifying and what is their agenda...
This is why the internet is such a wonderful thing, don't be fenced in by pre chewed and spun information...
If you don't trust Nielsen ratings, why are you reading things that only show you a sliver of that data and use it to make attacks?
Reading multiple sources doesn't matter if they're all trash, you'll read multiple biased accounts and then agree with the one conforming to your own bias. I don't read "rubber stamped information," I read things that can source their data and check the sources to make sure they aren't lying to me.
Your link's only source is another article that links to themselves multiple times before providing any source, a bad sign, then the source is provided without context. It basically says "lower on this list is worse therefore CNN sucks."
>Bitcoin is widely regarded as the first broadly successful ecash
system. An oft-cited concern, though, is that mining
Bitcoins wastes computational resources. Indeed, Bitcoin’s
underlying mining mechanism, which we call a scratch-off
puzzle (SOP), involves continuously attempting to solve computational
puzzles that have no intrinsic utility.
We propose a modification to Bitcoin that repurposes its
mining resources to achieve a more broadly useful goal: distributed
storage of archival data. We call our new scheme
Permacoin. Unlike Bitcoin and its proposed alternatives,
Permacoin requires clients to invest not just computational
resources, but also storage. Our scheme involves an alternative
scratch-off puzzle for Bitcoin based on Proofs-ofRetrievability
(PORs). Successfully minting money with this
SOP requires local, random access to a copy of a file. Given
the competition among mining clients in Bitcoin, this modi-
fied SOP gives rise to highly decentralized file storage, thus
reducing the overall waste of Bitcoin.
Using a model of rational economic agents we show that
our modified SOP preserves the essential properties of the
original Bitcoin puzzle. We also provide parameterizations
and calculations based on realistic hardware constraints to
demonstrate the practicality of Permacoin as a whole.
> But the truth is that there are far less women than men who are like that, and that this will never change because of biological factors.
What about all the women through the 40s up until the 80s who worked as computer programmers? For a while it was a seriously female dominated field. A woman wrote the first compiler. A woman wrote the code to help get us to the moon. A woman taught my CS courses in high school and i had two female CS professors in college (and just about half my graduating class in that major was female).
Did biology change? Where's the science that says women as a whole don't enjoy IT as much? You crow on and on about science but provide no citations, no logical coherent argument.
When I see posts like this on HN, it makes me think you haven't worked closely with women. Or even know any lol
And they all were all pretty mad. Which naturally nobody here seems to care about while everyone is busy writing up ten paragraphs of apologia about this stupid mess of an essay.
