tman

Reference? I'd like to see what percentage of California's population is the result of post-1960's immigration, the total tax input from this segment and their costs in government services.

I only point this out because some people I've come across on HN who think a Canadian-style immigration system is racist seem to think that public display of their own good intentions is much more important that looking up the numbers.

Now, if you want to do it fast, that's a different story.

a2 = a1^a1

...

a_n = a_(n-1)^a_(n-1)

My number is a_(a_(10^10))

1) Blacks commit on the order of 10x the violent crime of non-Hispanic whites and Asians in the US. This is well documented.

2) Africa has tremendous murder rates compared to almost everywhere else in the world. Again, well documented.

3) In this hemisphere, the majority black countries all have very high murder rates (Jamaica, Haiti) and the one major country with similar demographics to America has a similar problem with their black murder rate. Again, very well documented.

If you need Googling help on any of this, you can ask. But, really? Come on.

As far as this "racism" bugaboo you bring up...I know you didn't directly call me a racist, but that's just so tired. The Hap-map alone destroys any contention that we're all the same. We're different in countless ways. To me, that makes for a much more interesting world than one where everybody is a WASP under the skin. In fact, it's the race-deniers, not the realists, that I find to be the ones with the really dangerous and bigoted ideas.

Different peoples have different criminal tendencies? Well yeah. Let's admit it and do what we can to alleviate it rather than pretending it isn't there and building huge "great society" projects (The Projects) that make lives worse for the very people we're trying to help. Hurting black people with your verified non-racist good intentions is a really lousy way of helping black people.

Globally, you can look here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/oct/13/homicide...

The numbers in Africa look bad, but South Africa is really the only place in Africa together enough to do statistics on this stuff. Of course, they also have the highest murder rate in the world (one assumes that other parts would have them beat handily if they could count it all). Jamaica also tops the list in our Hemisphere. The rate cited there for Haiti is half as high as I've seen it elsewhere, but Haiti isn't a great place for accurate data collection, of course.

I've got some estimates for crime rates of African populations in places where they are severe minorities (there's a figure on the internet that claim 80% of London gun crime is African/Caribbean), but it's really hard to be very exact about this sort of thing.

It's a mess of numbers, but there just doesn't seem to be much room for the case that America's problems are special (Brazil, for example, has somewhat similar population demographics, and broadly similar problems).

But in what real-world mental challenges do old people have the advantage over the young? In mathematics, for example, you're an old man at 30. Except for Erdős the meth-addict, of course.

Maybe I am still misreading, what did you mean by "The answer to that one is pretty straightforward, well known, and easy to understand. And it has little to nothing to do with race. America is simply not an egalitarian society."

To me that looks like you're blaming the crime rate on our non-egalitarian social structure. Is that separate from culture in your book?

There are still things to be done about crime. Concentrating poverty (the projects) turns out to have been one of those really stupid progressive ideas. Crime rates for blacks in the south tend to be lower than in the north (I'll pass on that one). The post-1950s destruction of the black family (eclipsing slavery's destruction of it) seems to have been a bad thing. There are things you can fix. Just don't expect the effect to be huge.

On the other hand, if you attack the big SWPL shibboleths (human neurological uniformity, homosexuality as mirror-heterosexuality), you tend to get stomped on. I've known hard-core Marxists who are less fanatic about believing what they're supposed to believe about this sort of thing.

I generally assume it's because the worldview of the average HNer is not even a little bit informed by biology. Just look at the uncomprehending awe that your average hacker holds the for the term "neural network" or "genetic algorithm."

There is an efuse and they refer to it in the statement: "the technology is not loaded with the purpose of preventing a consumer device from functioning, but rather ensuring for the user that the device only runs on updated and tested versions of software". The technology is there in the device, says Motorola. It's just loaded with good intentions.

Now, what's it for? "If a device attempts to boot with unapproved software, it will go into recovery mode, and can re-boot once approved software is re-installed."

What does it mean that Motorola's "recovery mode" is eFuse based? It means exactly what was reported earlier. The phone is bricked until you go to the Motorola store to get your software reloaded and the eFuse reset. Find somewhere where Motorola says that you can get out of their friendly "recovery mode" without their assistance. If it walks like a brick, if it quacks like a brick...

What's a bigger issue to me is why so many hackers fall for easy market-speak like this. Are they English-challenged? Verbal-intelligence-challenged? Well, explains why certain politicians get so popular on the internets, I guess.

Why are Canadians (like whites everywhere) not having children? It strikes me that we should answer that question before replacing them by populations a bit further left on the civilizational bell curve.

To increase the strategy and reduce the drudgery, you could either implement APM restrictions directly on the player (drop clicks, etc. -- very annoying) or you could design units to be maximally effective by default, without micromanagement.

Here are some comparisons between the big 3 compression algorithms (taken from http://blogs.reucon.com/srt/tags/compression/ -- he used a 163 MB Mysql dump file for the tests):

  Compressor 	Size 	Ratio 	Compression 	Decompression
  gzip 	        89 MB 	54 % 	0m 13s 	        0m 05s
  bzip2 	81 MB 	49 % 	1m 30s 	        0m 20s
  7-zip 	61 MB 	37 % 	1m 48s 	        0m 11s

In point of fact, I just sent myself a very important password in clear text. Hack me.

There is a trade-off here between security and usability. 99% security is good enough for a lot of purposes and has its place.

Technically, it's the same problem as email spam, and most of the same tools can be used to combat it. Posterous should flag posts that they aren't sure of and make users confirm them before putting them up, etc.

EDIT:

The other fix would be to use an email address that can't be guessed from the blog address. In other words, the email address is the password.

Last month's release of 4.5.0 is stable, but the C++0x support is experimental.

  bind(std::plus<int>(), _1, bind(&Die::faceValue, _2))

Luckily the lambda syntax from the new standard already appears to be available in experimental gcc. This is going to be a game-changer.

And there needs to be serious backup software built into every version of Windows (not just the premium versions). The recovery discs should be as ubiquitous as AOL CDs, recovery partitions on every hard drive, etc. Backups should be on by default and as simple to use as Time Machine.

In fact, if they were really going to do it right, they'd go to a repository system for software (like Linux uses), give free online backups for user data to everyone, and basically make the process of duplicating your home computer somewhere and somewhen else a point and click exercise.

Instead, what we get is a company that manages to steal Apple's bad ideas, ignores its own innovative ideas, and delivers products that are only 90% there. It's painful to see so much wasted potential.

Ah well, if Microsoft shareholders ever get tired of Ballmer and want to give me a call, I'm on the internet.

If Microsoft had released it in 1999 instead of 2009, they wouldn't have Apple and Google nipping at their heels today. It's that simple.

4 years out of a young person's life when a 2-hour test works better for predicting job performance is sort of awful, isn't it?.

2. Full Web -- You don't really want Flash.

3. R,S,P -- Flash is some buggy shit.

4. Battery -- Forcing you not to use Flash saves your batteries! Aren't we nice?

5. Touch -- Multi-touch fail. We can't hover like a mouse.

6. We're saving the developers from themselves. The morons.

I think that sufficiently sharpens the contradictions.

Now, the problem that gay men seem to have with sexual abuse (while Catholic) wasn't enough to give you pause? It gives me pause. I'm even worried about allowing men (gay or straight) to be baby sitters. Because sexual abuse is an out-sized male thing. Does it bother me that men would be harmed by this restriction? No. Identity politics disgust me, even white male identity politics.

On to your argument. Why have high standards for adoption? Because there are too many people who want to adopt (white kids), and too few (white) kids to go around. Hence, we can be demanding.

Arguments to be "fair" don't go far with me.

Do you mean, "Let us be willfully blind and refuse to engage our senses, not recognizing any differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals despite large behavioral differences (beyond sexual preference) which do exist."

Or do you mean, "Despite your arguments, I categorically state that no differences between these groups exist (beyond the sexual preference of each). I state this without any argument of my own, please accept it for no reason that I care to state."

Before we get to adoption, lets analyze an easier statement: Gays shouldn't be allowed to become Catholic priests.

What? Can it be defended?

Well, you've heard about the abuse cases. Two-thirds of the problem, going by published numbers, involve priests who have sex with young boys. These are not children, but rather teenagers. There can be argument about whether homosexual sex with a pre-pubescent is really homosexual behavior, but there is no argument about post-pubescent sex. This is a problem with gay priests.

At most, gay priests make up 30% of the Catholic clergy. More likely, they are in the 10-20% range. The male population is 3% homosexual (yes, I know you heard 10% and that you should drink 8 glasses of water a day and that we only use 10% of our brains; the 3% number for male homosexuality has the advantage of actual facts to back it up). So gays make up an out-sized proportion of Catholic priests and there are various reasons for that. Guilt, etc., of course, and a homosexual seminary culture that is now being rooted out by Catholics who (somewhat wrongly) blame it for lots of things that are wrong with the Church.

Regardless, the gay Catholic priests seem to be committing a far out-sized proportion of the abuse. The Church simply can't afford to keep paying out the damage settlements that it would have to in order to keep its gay clergy. The congregations don't like the clergy having sex with their young boys either. Hence, expect to see less gay priests going forward.

While many gay men make wonderful priests, a few ruin it for the rest of them.

So, adoption? While a person could make arguments about equality and fairness before the law, etc., I personally have a low tolerance for that sort of democratic cant and tune it out. It's illogical rabble-rousing. As Socrates says (I'll point out that I'm a fan of the Symposium -- yes, that's the Platonic dialogue on love with a disturbing amount of gay sex thrown in), democracies equate things that are not equal.

Throw those arguments out -- which I do, and with prejudice -- and you have to make a case for choosing a segment of our population (homosexuals) that is more likely to do drugs, have psychiatric problems, etc., etc., and singling them out to allow adoption. It's not a brilliant move.

Aside: The percentage of the female population that is homosexual is harder to get a feel for, but somewhere around 1.5% seems to be exclusively homosexual. Bisexual behavior is much more common in females, or so Kinsey found. The weirdness of homosexuality in humans, a weirdness found in only one other mammal, so far as I know, is that opportunistic homosexual behavior. That happens all the time in the animal kingdom. It's exclusive homosexuality that is non-standard. That's bizarre from a fitness standpoint. There are some electrode studies (electrodes + dirty pictures, you imagine the rest) that suggest that there are no genuine bisexual males as far as desire goes, only males that are bisexual in behavior. It's harder to tell with females (30% or more are unaroused by dirty pictures of either sex, which ruins the studies).

Penny Arcade's comment on this is wonderfully wrong: "If a hundred artists create art for five years, how could the result not be art?"

Interestingly, that's exactly the sort of film that fails to be art. Great films are, without exception, products of a single driving vision, not designed by committee.

The only way to really claim that video games are art is to say, "Here, this game X is the equivalent to The Seven Samurai." Only that's not going to happen, because it doesn't exist. And because it doesn't exist, Ebert gets pummeled with long screeds of gamer angst rather than the only answer that would matter: "Game X is art."

Instead, we got a lot of (now somewhat wasted) effort on concepts. I like concepts in principle, but too many C++ people saw concepts as a way to write provable code and unreadable library documentation instead of as a way to simplify compiler error messages.