Forgot your password?

Comment: "magic of data mining" (Score 1) 578

by peter303 (#46756561) Attached to: IRS Can Now Seize Your Tax Refund To Pay a Relative's Debt
I suspect some clever system analyst did a 'join" on survivor benefit recipients and IRS joint (marriage) filings to discover remarried widow[ers] in old records. Otherwise pure SS records would not have detected this situation. And tape-based computers before 1990 were too slow to attempt an inter-agency join like this.

So we have the means to detect financial crimes buried in records decades ago. But it feels unfair to be pursed so many years later, espcially for the actions of a dead relative. There so many financial crimes being commited on current returns like SSDI overpayments, fake EICs, etc., that data-mining effort would be better spent on current crimes.

Comment: got it half right (Score 1) 572

by peter303 (#46726067) Attached to: Michael Bloomberg: You Can't Teach a Coal Miner To Code
I think Bloomie meant than any one job category isnt going to a panecea for unemployement. That is you cant teach and motivate everyone to be coders or health workers or roustabouts. However, its dumb to say that any one particular profession cant learn another. A given miner may could become a great programmer. But not all of them.

Comment: HFT algorithms already manage this (Score 1) 342

by peter303 (#46683945) Attached to: Australia May 'Pause' Trades To Tackle High-Frequency Trading
According to last years ACM issue on HFT algorithms, trades already presented in time-tic goups. Just currently much shorter than you propose. The ACM articles discussed tricks to jump to the head of a group/queue.

HFT also manages the randomness in order presentation. At millisecond resolution TCp/IP collisions cancelations become a serious issue. The smae ACM issues discusses how to game this.

Evey constraint you popose algorthmically will probably be beaten by another clever computer executed algorithm.

Comment: MIT debating a computer science requirement (Score 1) 226

by peter303 (#46683801) Attached to: Should Microsoft Give Kids Programmable Versions of Office?
MIT has been debating to add a computer science requirement for over 30 years. Interesting Idaho schools has beaten them. MIT came pretty close a few years ago proposing to replace the 2nd required physics course with an engineering choice, one which could be computer science.

The arguments AGAINST this new requirment include that (1) MIT already specifies 7(*) of the 16 year long courses the average undergraduate takes. Another would start to eat in the requirments of intensive majors like engineering. (2) Most MIT stiudents know some computer programming before they enter MIT, although it is not of software engineering quality.

(*) Year of calculus, year of physics, year of chemistry/biology, four years of humanities. Even if you are a music major.

A slow pup is a lazy dog. -- Willard Espy, "An Almanac of Words at Play"