Comment Re:Nice improvement (Score 1) 34
When you're talking petabytes and "reading DNA", I don't think 60 minutes is the right order of magnitude.
When you're talking petabytes and "reading DNA", I don't think 60 minutes is the right order of magnitude.
Socialism with American Characteristics
Iowa's rolling farm fields of coffee
I'm not sure this is going to be public facing. Many of the objections seem to assume that it is. OTOH, AI is known for returning the answers you want it to return, regardless of the truth of those answers. So perhaps it's the perfect yes-man.
I'm not going to claim those are harmless, but banning them appears more socially destructive than allowing them.
Going to a particular date on a tape is a seek operation. A better reply would be that there's more than on kind of cassette. (1/2" tape has been in cassettes before, just not the kind you usually think of. And that was durable enough to allow a reasonable number of seeks. But I'd sure hate to have to patch a tape with that density.)
But how long does it take to search to the particular bits you were looking for? How many times can you search through the tape before it breaks? There are reasons random access cassettes were never popular.
It's not hard to believe. There are lots of plausible explanations. Most likely some of the chips are multi-function,but sold to do one particular job (so only partially documented).
That doesn't imply that the chip didn't have a built-in radio, just that it couldn't transmit or receive without some ancillary mechanisms.
I suspect the claim is technically true, but the reason is that the chips were designed to be sold to different people to do different things.
Are you reasonably certain that this claim is false? Remember that the US is trying to do something similar to NVidia chips. Also lots of chips are multipurpose, with the same chip being sold to different people for different functions.
I'm not sure I believe it, but I'm also not certain it's wrong.
Indeed, I fully agree. The funny thing is, monthly numbers would help us move away from the distortions of the quarterly cycle. If key data reporting becomes frequent enough, you can't get into a cycle of "do adverse-numbers stuff early in the quarter and then cram positive-numbers stuff into the end of the quarter". You have to - *gasp* - just run your business normally.
Some businesses could still manage to switch to a monthly cycle, but anyone who deals significantly in transoceanic feedstocks/parts/goods shipments won't be able to.
BLS numbers aren't some sort of dark art. They're literally just the compiled numbers reported by companies. Numbers are what they are. To fight against jobs numbers is to fight against reality.
People get confused by the existence of revisions. The problem is that not all data gets reported in a timely manner. When late data comes in, it causes revisions to the earlier reported numbers, either up or down.
Firing the head of the BLS because you don't like what numbers US companies reported is just insane Banana Republic-level nonsense.
Yes, he fired the same person who was ultimately responsible for putting out crap numbers.
US reporting has always been the gold standard. Nobody has accused the BLS of "crap numbers" until Trump decided he didn't like them. It's is so way outside the norms it doesn't even resemble something that could conceivably happen in the US; this is banana republic-level stuff.
Yeah, as an investor, my reaction to this proposal was, oh HELL no.
TL / DR:
BLS chief: "Jobs are turning bad now."
Trump: "Fake news, you're fired. I'm appointing a January 6th rioter conspiracy theorist to head the BLS!"
BLS today: "Jobs were ALREADY bad!"
What this country needs is a dime that will buy a good five-cent bagel.