UIUC_06

34 ms·

331.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
That's good to know. Even Google's OCR in English is pretty spotty, so I can just imagine what it does with other languages.
332.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
I'm actually writing this on Brave on MacOS. I also have Chrome. I practically never use Safari. (I don't have an iPhone, though.) So they don't have it on the AppStore? Who cares?
333.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
These 1950 census records were written in cursive. Quite readable to a human; not so much to a computer. I should mention that the 1950 census DOES have a text search facility. It did not work for my family.
334.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
The guy who mentioned LDS was spot on. I wandered into one of their "family research centers" once and they spent an hour with me, all free. Unfortunately, as I've discovered myself, it is NOT true that everything is digitize
335.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
> I remember pretty fondly the era of the Yahoo directory, where things were cultivated by humans not looking for profit. We had a lot of fun pages, fan pages, and so on. We need that again, our souls need that again. The "directory
336.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
For me, my life began the morning after I graduated high school. The only people from before that I'm NOT in touch with but want to be are unfindable on Google because their names are too common. I know I probably could locate them wit
337.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
OK, good point. I recall that their stock holdings were worth quite a bit. Still, $44B!
338.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
An opportunity for me to not hijack the conversation! You brought up for-profit boards! OK, a pet peeve. They don't seem to suffer any consequences, and yet they really should. Let's look at Yahoo [1]. This is not just a story
339.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
They have one job. It's called "science." They go to school for that. Other people, including the voting public, have the job of determining policy based on what they find.
340.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Going for my credentials! Smooth move. "Birds cause some fires" is a conclusion you can find with a minimal search on Google Scholar. It's been documented before. That seems to be the only contribution of this paper. This w
341.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
> at least we can all agree... No, we can't all agree. On anything. Given that the Chinese have shut down investigation, how would you expect anyone to tell you exactly how it happened?
342.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Excuse me, but scientists are not public policy makers. Their job is to follow the evidence, not publish based on what they think will happen if they do.
343.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Oh, come off it. This might be respectable as a high school science project. "What percentage of forest fires were caused by birds?" would be one question I'd expect to see answered. Their reports were from five years ago a
344.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Your point is, they were careful to winnow down the data? Yes, but they started with a faulty data collection method, so if anything, they were probably understating the problem. Also not comparing their results to those from other method
345.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
> To better document this fowl play, Taylor Barnes, a biologist at EDM International, an engineering consultancy firm in Colorado, collected data on wildfires across the United States. He and his colleagues used Google Alerts to monitor
346.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
There's a very, very good reason for not wanting to know, and undercover organizations (legal or otherwise) have always exploited it: You can't spill what you don't know. If you're an illegal or espionage group, your mem
347.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
The "percent of the people like the movie" still doesn't tell you anything about WHO those people are. Nor does (number of promoters) / (number of detractors). "professional critic reviews" ?? Please. I'l
348.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
For kitchen devices, ATK or SeriousEats. Anything else: if you don't have a site you trust, then the only recourse is to look at LOTS of sites and read between the lines. By "sites" I also include "user forums." Thi
349.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Anytime the person recommending X is also the person who sells you X, you should be suspicious. The guy who comes to your door saying your roof needs fixing? That guy. Without discounting any of the bad experiences people have had here: I&#
350.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
This has been around for a very long time, long enough for Cheech & Chong to parody it [1]. Paraphrasing what Woody Allen said: I took the Evelyn Wood speed reading course and it really works! I read "War and Peace" in a hour
351.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
David Boies got an undeserved reputation out of it as the killer cross-examination lawyer. People used to do the "Jaws" theme when he approached the witness stand. I think Gates made it too easy for him. Since then, he completely
352.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
> incomplete, unpolished, not quite at the "bar" Do you think your coworkers were telling you your bar was too high?
353.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
> I've also noticed that, up to a certain point, the smarter a person is, the more it has to be apparent in their work. Every algorithm needs to be perfect, every function needs to be side-effects free, every data structure needs to
354.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Great video, thanks. 5:50 "First step back" you guys in the outfield! Everyone knows that.
355.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
An excellent article. I'm not a cricket player (I did try it once), but I think there's a lot here that a baseball or softball hitter could benefit from. You hear about "red dot sliders" in baseball: a slider that's
356.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
A silly Pop Psych article, with lots of white space and short paragraphs to make it "easily digestible." There are eons' worth of literature on "how to be happy" and addressing the question of "what is the good
357.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Bargain on price. Not in a "regular" retail store, but in any case where a single person has the authority to adjust the price: any kind of street market, for instance. True story: I was in England and with some friends who live t
358.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
You are assuming that the homeless person is drunk, begging for money, strung out, etc., or otherwise in need of your help. Those people probably aren't good candidates for a friendly chat anyway. Believe it or not, there are plenty wh
359.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
I guess you don't walk around with a cute, friendly dog. Normal people interact with us all the time. You might try just being friendly with people some time. It's only weird if you go about it in a weird way.
360.
by UIUC_06 4y ago
Chat with a homeless person. No social worker talk. Don't ask them anything about how they got there, how their life is, what they need, etc. etc. Just treat them like a normal person: weather, sports, local traffic, etc.

More ›