You are right, I should not have used many but the nondescript "some". However my argument that this problem would be lessened by decriminalization does not depend on a specific percentage.
Once we have androids for this task I wonder what will happen to the sex industry. What are the moral implications of buying a female android companion in the 2045 edition of Amazon.com
* MapCodes are shorter by 200-300% for a given accuracy level, assuming each MapCode is prefixed by a two-letter country code for clarity.
Cons of MapCodes vs. Geohashes:
* MapCodes only offer one accuracy level, of apprx. 100 m^2 regions, whereas a Geohash can be arbitrarily accurate.
* MapCodes do not guarantee persistence. They can be redefined at any time, for any reason, at the sole discretion of the project designer, leaving you with a nonreferential or falsely referential code.
* MapCodes do not encode location data within the code, so access to the server is required at all times. If you lack internet access, or if the service is DDoSed, hacked, goes out of business, etc. your codes become useless.
Yes, and I'm glad that I was allowed to change the title of the article to indicate the reason why this is relevant to HN.
Edit2: and now the title got reverted to the article title, which obscures what's interesting to HN readers. Oh well, inflexible policy in action.
EDIT: Given the poor quality of the discussion, I now regret posting this link. Very little discussion of the Wayback machine and how this is a new and interesting way to collect information, and lots of off-topic stuff on the right to be forgotten or non-wayback-machine-related items about this incident.
Ok, we'll change the title back again. I don't think this thread was destined to be very substantive, though. The topic is too hot, for more than one meaning of "hot".
Thanks, dang. In hindsight, yeah, this was not a good thing to post, even if it is very interesting that the Wayback Machine can play this kind of role.
We do sometimes edit mainstream press headlines to replace a generic phrase (like "web") with a technical name (in this case, "wayback machine" or maybe "internet archive") that HN readers are comfortable with. So your edit was fine. We just didn't notice that right away.
You answered a question about comparative scientist competence (which is highly objective, because it's judged on the basis of peer review of published work) with stats about elementary school grades handed out by teachers (which is highly subjective, because it's a virtually unchecked power, almost never judged by any outside auditor), not to mention the difference in age, task, environment -- basically every single criterion is different. It's not a question of liking anything. You're simply trying to move goalposts.
Judging by the various forms of intellectual dishonesty you've attempted thus far, I would gladly do my utmost to prevent anyone the least bit like you from finding employment anywhere near me for as long as I live.
This thread started with drz saying we should leave everyone to their own devices, and "those with highest merit deserve representation". I agree that this should be happening, but I disagree that it is happening. drz then claimed that you can't dictate interest. I disagreed. drz claimed that only taking and passing CS courses can "show interest". This is obviously false; if ever a woman was interested but then discriminated against, she might not pass the CS course. I submitted an article on stereotype threat, which is one reason that competent women might not succeed in class or industry. I think drz took this to mean that I thought women were, on average, as competent as men. I admit to getting confused at that last change in topic since I don't think it's relevant or interesting. No one in the original article, or anyone else in this conversation, has made that claim.
Yes, females mostly lack emotional maturity. Thank you for demonstrating the obvious. But males mostly don't. You preposterously claim that they do, and it is outright wrong.
Weren't you just saying men are more prone to violence when bullying? What's a less mature way of dealing with your emotions than resorting to physical violence?
I'd argue that unprovoked violence is also an indicator of emotional immaturity (or other emotional problems), but bullies are a small minority of all males. Females who can't control their emotional reactions to external stimuli, on the other hand, are virtually all of them.
Hm. So females are an abnormal, minute percentage of the population not worthy of any attention at all? And when you said absolutely anyone could do it, I guess that doesn't include women, right? They're not really people I guess. Or at least, they're not adults. Just emotionally immature children we should shepherd and guide. Obviously they should not be allowed to affect important things like work or politics, since they don't have the emotional maturity. /sarcasm
Wow, I almost forgot people like you really existed... Who let you into the civilized portion of the internet? Can somebody check this guy's pass? I think he's in the wrong section. His misogyny is leaking out.
How many? What percentage? Citation needed.
Weasel words will get you nowhere.