Nicolas Bourbaki asks me to tell you that he is not impressed.
Really, how does it matter? What matters is how true and relevant what they wrote is. Knowing who they are may shed some light about that, especially when financial gain is involved, but it is only a proxy.
This article seems quite positive about the CLOUD act.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has quite a different take: The CLOUD Act: A Dangerous Expansion of Police Snooping on Cross-Border Data.
Is
At some point, people and society will need to realize that a deep change in our way of apprehending riches will be needed. AI is only the latest step. The change that came progressively is the increase of productivity: in the past, we needed every body working all day, or we would starve. Now, one person alone can produce enough for several people, and if everybody works, then we produce too much to consume it all.
Yet, society uses work (and capital, but that is another question) to distribute the produced riches. Therefore, everybody needs a job, and thus we invent bullshit jobs, like putting groceries in bags.
Therefore, society must adapt to consider it is normal that not all people work. Let them make art, science, culture instead. Or be couch potatoes, if they want.
But we need to invent a way of distributing riches that is not entirely related to work.
Alternate formulation of the conclusion: now that they can observe the world more easily, American teenagers start to realize how crappy the world really is, completely unlike the imagined perfect America they have been fed all their lives like their parents and their parents' parents, and therefore no longer feel the same entitlement and superiority towards the rest of the world.
And now they see how crappy the world is, maybe they will try to change it.
In other countries, with far lower medical costs than America, when you "go to the doctor" you are much more likely to actually be seeing a nurse or PA.
I am pretty sure you are quite mistaken. For France, I know you are.
In France, the official fee is 25€, minus 16.50€ reimbursed by the Sécurité sociale. I do not find on the web stastics on how many doctors follow the official fee (“conventionnés secteur 1”), but partial statistics seems to indicate they are the huge majority of general practitioners. At least I can say that I had no trouble finding several of them in my neighborhood.
And they are actual medical doctors, not nurses or anything else. And most of those I visited spend time with their patients, they do not expedite them to make a living.
I think you need browse some more to know why the medical costs are so high in the United States of America. You can probably start with the “Adam Ruins the Hospital” episode of “Adam Ruins Everything”, I remember it covered that topic.
And by the way, the nameless country between Canada and Mexico is not the whole of America.
Something that has been published cannot, in all generality, be “unpublished”, be it a Facebook post, a tweet or a column in a high school newspaper. If you are high-profile enough to warrant the efforts, people will manage to dig dirt.
But the article says: “Over multiple years, we all change. Things we said in 2011 may or may not represent us today.” And another point: people make mistakes, people should not be judged on their mistakes but on how they react to them.
The public needs to understand that, more than a “right to be forgotten” or a “start over” button: people's lives and careers should not be broken because of something they said ten years ago (provided they do not still say the same today) or a message they retracted after a few minutes.
What a surprise! Anybody who keeps informed has known for a long time that “IQ” was meaningless, and that IQ tests only evaluated the ability to succeed at IQ tests, nothing related to any kind of intelligence whatsoever.
“Nice” (i.e. commercial) websites have become immensely complex in design. Not because their needs has grown immensely complex; they have grown complex, but not that much. Because they are poorly designed in their workings. Developers in the same company cannot be bothered to make reusable libraries, and when they can, they mess the API stability and require several versions of the same library within a single project. Requests are resolved using queries to caches to proxies to No wonder the output of even a single request cannot be decided before examining the whole universe and its neighbourhood.
It seems to me this feature is just another step in that direction: make things a little more complex for an immediate gain, and let the future take care of itself. Slowly.
If I try this with the calculator on my Android phone, I get “+ Error: Too Few Arguments" as soon as I hit the first +. Guess what is my favourite calculator app.
Indeed, I was about to post that this was a typical “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy, but you beat me to it.
In this particular instance, there is an obvious common cause: being open to artificial stimulations of the mind.
One of the problems in this story is that the patent offices are not responsible for the patents. If they grant a patent, they cash a yearly fee. If a patent is overthrown in justice, they keep the fees. They have no incentive to screen the applications properly.
One of the first measures to fix the issues would be to make them responsible: if a parent they granted gets overthrown in justice, they should refund all the fees, plus the cost of the prior art research that was obviously botched. That would give them the incentive to do their work.
Do not forget the infamous “zero-hour conracts”, where the person has, technically, a job, but not actually an income. It looks like there are almost a million of these in Maggie's country.
the proxy server, or that guy in sitting next to me at Starbucks.
Which is exactly what I said in my first message: for public access like Starbucks, it makes a little sense. For home access, where the only people in between are network operators, the likelihood of a MitM is tiny.
The CA IS chosen by the client.
No, the CA is chosen by the server. The only choice for the client is to either trust or not trust. They cannot decide to use another CA with more guarantees.
defining that a server belongs to a domain that it claims
Which is all but useless, and exactly the source of the present thread.
They cannot work the way I evoke when the CA is chosen by the server and not the client.
RAM wasn't built in a day.
