“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
Complete conjecture, but my money is on IPCCs estimates for other sources being a little too conservative, not some entirely new explanation.
The other sources are glacial melt, heat expansion, and water storage on land decreasing.
You need both the models and the data. Facts without theory answer only what happened, not why, you can't make projections without theory. Theory without facts... pretty obvious problem there.
You might have a tip about a merger because a PI is watching a corporate parking lot. Just because something is a secret, doesn't mean an insider leak is the only way for it to be known.
There is a difference between psychological manipulation and cultivating confusion or blatantly misleading. An ethics still applies to marketing's use of psychological manipulation that asks the customer to participate.
>The hobbyist. Why would anyone else be liable for something a person did that then failed and caused harm?
The hobbyist isn't the one with money. The manufacturer will be sued, and they usually settle because there is probably something they could have done that would have made the failure less likely, injury trials are bad press, and jury sympathy is always on the injured little guy's side.
This is how it plays out with physical products, I don't see why it would be any different with code.
That's not what happens if a hobbyist modifies e.g. the brakes, then the brakes break and the car crashes - if you modified the thing, you're responsible for the issues your modifications cause.
You're looking at a piece of equipment that can be used to generate income, maybe that's what it's for. It also could have been cheap/broken/free, and they intend to flip it.
>I think it's easier to defend the claim that the kids lacked guidance and support to take advantage of the education provided for them.
That guidance is a critical part of a "good" education. Unfortunately, we leave it up to parents and don't have a way to teach them how to raise a successful kid.
"The analysis unit works in tandem with a traditional supercomputer. Initial models will start at 1.32 petaflops and will ramp up to 300 petaflops by 2020.
The Optalysys Optical Solver Supercomputer will initially offer 9 petaflops of compute power, increasing to 17.1 exaflops by 2020."
Recognizing patterns in data is so easy to do, that how easy it is, turns out to be a major problem in machine learning. You can always find some explanation that perfectly fits all the data you see, but that doesn't mean it will fit the data you haven't yet seen.
The challenge is finding the simplest patterns that will generalize to explain the most data, while wasting as little effort as possible on the irrelevant patterns. In high dimension data, the number of possible relationships to analyze explode, you can find patterns everywhere you look, so it's deciding where to bother looking with your limited resources that's hard.
That patterns are nothing special doesn't seem obvious to us because, evolution has done a pretty good job solving this problem(in the domain of inputs we evolved to deal with), and we only perceive those patterns that are likely to generalize.
“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
Complete conjecture, but my money is on IPCCs estimates for other sources being a little too conservative, not some entirely new explanation.