dschuetz

57 ms·

631.
by dschuetz 9y ago
I wonder if that's an exclusively German thing, their authorities never question results if the process itself is approved by law making and courts. "The results are too implausible to be true, but heck, who am I to question the p
632.
by dschuetz 9y ago
"Quantum" is a science-y sounding word which sensationalist scientists use to push their otherwise inexplicable "exciting" ideas for fundraising. It's a joke in itself. A parody of what physics actually is. Even the
633.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Quantum radar will expose quantum stealth of quantum aircraft. I'm getting quantum sick.
634.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Whenever Nvidia issues a research paper on how well their products work for AI applications like that in their paper I feel like instantly buying some of their more expensive scientific products.
635.
by dschuetz 9y ago
So, basically a single big offshore turbine 5-10MW can power a single electrical locomotive with power ranges 5000-10000 kW continuously. That's rather impressive considering how insanely powerful locomotives are.
636.
by dschuetz 9y ago
I'm sorry, stupid question, but exacly how much power do those big ones generate? 20 times more than what? This actually most crucial tidbit isn't even covered in that article, or am I blind?
637.
by dschuetz 9y ago
There is some point in history of a profession where the people engaging in this profession begin to look and sound like a parody of it. When the stereotype (stuff of jokes) is status quo and any deviance or individualism is considered &quo
638.
by dschuetz 9y ago
I agree that if your hobby starts making more money than your actual job it's really attractive to think of a media startup then. It doesn't mean though that you just switch. You have to know how volatile it might be. You have
639.
by dschuetz 9y ago
"Digesting" enzymes? "Boost recycling"? That sound like a typical click bait. It's actually an artificially engineered enzyme formerly discovered in certain bacteria which is able to break PET molecules. Lots of pot
640.
by dschuetz 9y ago
I agree that it's unclear why Youtube just changes the rules, disregaring their actual audience magnets and causal effects. As for "blame Youtube for encouraging", well, yes, sure you can blame Youtube for encouraging other p
641.
by dschuetz 9y ago
You cannot compare "content creation" on Youtube with entrepreneurship. There are different sets of rules. Youtube does not employ "creators". Creators suffering from anxiety because of endangered income should first get
642.
by dschuetz 9y ago
I find it particularly funny that he doesn't explain why his binaries are literally plagued with "false positives". I'm really curious. Does he use some arcane compression techniques which usually are found in virus sign
643.
by dschuetz 9y ago
That sounds really condescending, to be honest.
644.
by dschuetz 9y ago
It's a two-sided coin actually. You cannot blame Youtube for people's choices to go fully dependent on viewer count revenues, it's irresponsible to say the least. But, you can blame Youtube for changing the rules whenever and
645.
by dschuetz 9y ago
That's the narrative you get if you say that the internet, the web and its users are broken: "Does it affect me? No. Does it still work for me? Yes. Is the internet broken? For users who don't know how to use it, yes." S
646.
by dschuetz 9y ago
This guy isn't defending Facebook, I think, by making "bad people doing bad things" the culprits of breaking the Internet and making it toxic. I think it's his way saying that Facebook amplified it a lot. I agree, he is
647.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Yes, we all know that. But how many users did the early Internet have, and how many now? And who helped it grow? People like those who contemplate in the interview.
648.
by dschuetz 9y ago
...and the article is not about Facebook.
649.
by dschuetz 9y ago
It depends on how you read it. Contemplative readers might get upset too for a bit, but then focus on the actual problem - how to fix it?
650.
by dschuetz 9y ago
...and they want the users to keep thinking that. The online ad industry is awfully quiet, you do not hear or read anywhere how lucrative it is. The users shall keep thinking that the Internet is for Facebook. The boards of the online compa
651.
by dschuetz 9y ago
It's an interview, actually. The important part is below, where "the people who built it" talk about what went wrong. It's about the Internet since the beginning. Instead of taking the actual title, I decided to use the
652.
An apology for the internet from the people who built it(nymag.com)
48 points by dschuetz 9y ago|59 comments
653.
by dschuetz 9y ago
A healthy person is bad for pharmaceutical business and doctors, yet very good for health and life insurances.
654.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Yes, I see the trouble. The team "strongly arguing" that they have found the source of the signal while not sharing their raw data. Evidence for dark matter is a big deal so who wants to give away credit for that? Or, who wants to
655.
by dschuetz 9y ago
LSD + "Energy perception" = Free Energy Movement wavies.
656.
by dschuetz 9y ago
It's likely that they might see the power lines' magnetic "signature" before everything else, as if the lines are highlighted or marked by a visual filter. Large congregations of birds on power lines preparing for a flig
657.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Most likely it would seem as if the air is distorted by some diffuse gas other than the air contains. If you vent a nitrogen gas bottle you'll see a shadow that the gas escapes, but you cannot see it with the naked eye. So, for seeing
658.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Money and politics is basically the way people run things, as sad as it sounds. You can substitute money with something different, it doesn't matter as people need some system of exchange. Money seems effective and easy enough. So, it&
659.
by dschuetz 9y ago
Fun fact: Google collects much more data from Android devices than from iOS devices. This might be unsurprising, and even obvious, but I was surprised how precise and intrusive that data is. The whole time I was using an Android phone with
660.
by dschuetz 9y ago
That question ist weird. "Sure, why not?" would be my reply to that. I thought one should avoid yes/no questions for a paper? I'm not a neuroscientist (I cannot afford medical education), nor am I a microprocessor engine

More ›