Airgaps don't work, ...

Yes, they do.

... Stuxnet proved you can still take down an airgapped network ...

It's not whether an attack is still possible. It's about reducing the number of people who can successfully attack it.

Stuxnet, as far as I know, depended upon someone physically smuggling in a USB device loaded with 0 day exploits.

So the airgap worked. But their physical security failed.

Not to mention any means of verifying what is running on their systems.

And it can be hilarious.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/56279/who-originally-said-im-not-doctor-i-play-one-tv

Which is also the reason why "dentists" in advertisements wear stethoscopes.

... I'd think a more rigorous study would be to have both the teachers and the strangers grade the same exam....

Based upon that I would say that the "study" was fatally flawed.

Photocopies.

I was giving the "researchers" too much credit for knowing how to do basic research.

The problem is that the anonymous scores were higher for girls.

So without a name, the girls (theoretically) completed more of the problems, correctly.

In order for the boys to score higher the teacher has to give a boy more points for either doing less work or including more errors.

Alice sets up the problem correctly. And completes it correctly except for 1 error.

Bob sets up the problem correctly. And completes it correctly except for 2 errors.

And Bob gets more points.

AND TFA seems to be saying that this in endemic to that system.

I'm wondering if those math teachers are qualified to teach math. The whole point of required that work be shown is so that the teach can look for errors in both the process and the math.

The students were given two exams, one graded by outsiders who did not know their identities and another by teachers who knew their names.

Okay.

In math, the girls outscored the boys in the exam graded anonymously, but the boys outscored the girls when graded by teachers who knew their names.

How the fuck does that happen?

2+2=4 whether you are a boy or a girl.

How is a teacher grading that differently based on the kids' names?

The problem with the Turing Test is that it's so often done wrong.

I don't see that as a problem with the test itself.

I see that as various individuals trying to cheat in order to claim that they have achieved something they have not.

Suppose someone claimed to have beaten the world record for the 200 meter dash. But could only do it with a 190 meter headstart.

Okay, no headstart but I get to use a motorcycle.

Okay, okay, no headstart and no motorcycle but I will be using "meters" that are 10cm long.

No one would bother reporting on those because those are STUPID.

But the equivalent claims can be made about "beating" the Turing Test because the people reporting on it are STUPID. As you've pointed out, the test itself is easy to set up and easy to verify. There is no problem with the test.

It doesn't matter. The domain names are only worth whatever someone will pay for them. Sure, he's made millions in the past with some high profile sales. But that's in the past.

How much do you think gouda.com is worth?

What kind of startup would trade part of themselves for gouda.com?

I looked through my bookmarks and I didn't find a single instance that would be considered "generic". The closest was amazon. Which has nothing to do with the Amazon or Amazons.

Once you give your data to "the cloud" it ceases to be YOUR data.

Now it belongs to whomever owns those servers.

You want to keep it? Then keep it on your own hardware.

"People are unpredictable. What happens if the person is not doing what they're asked or expected to do, and the car is moving at sixty miles per hour?" Zilberstein asked.

So the car is travelling at 60 MPH on automatic when a situation arises that requires the car to switch to human-control ... and there might be a problem with the human not reacting correctly?

I think that the problem would be expecting the human to take control and do anything useful at that speed if the programming couldn't handle it.

And even more about crappy reporting. This has NOTHING to do with Turing or his test.

That's not the only thing that doesn't make sense. From the summary:

"What's the case for...not just world language is good, world language is well-rounded, but world language is so super-duper-duper good that you should spend two years of your life doing them and specifically better than something else like coding?"

It's NOT "two years". It's ONE HOUR a day (Monday-Friday).

You can take other classes on those days. INCLUDING CODING CLASSES.

Imposing the same approach on private schools seems like overreach.

Why? It's not like infections only happen in schools. Or that students spend 100% of their time at school. Look at the Disneyland outbreak.

Also, HepB shouldn't be in the schedule of required vaccines to enter kindergarten given its method of transmission.

I think that you are under the impression that it is ONLY transmitted via sex or needles.

The first problem is that this is not about correlation or causation. TFA is just a mess. Here's an example:

There were quite a few other striking differences in leadership:

Men tended to achieve better results than women in companies with up to 1,000 people, however in larger companies, female CEOs averaged 18% higher revenue per employee than their male counterparts

Companies with female CEOs were more likely to work in the B2C space, while male CEOs were more likely to work in B2B

There are more women in healthcare and non-profit organizations, while men dominated the manufacturing and construction space.

None of those three examples have anything to do with leadership.

That's "apples vs oranges" not "correlation vs causation".

I suggest you check what that actual advice was.

Sugar is a carbohydrate. You are not going to be healthy on a diet of "Twizzlers" even though they are low fat, high carb and vegan-friendly.

You CANNOT go by what some article says about what "science" has now "found" about X.

The idiots writing the articles are idiots AND they're writing the articles for maximum sensationalism.

Dude! Use your BRAIN!