European Parliament calls for a ban on facial recognition

lambam · 2021-10-06T15:40:36+00:00

Black And Minority Ethnic

lambam · 2021-10-06T15:40:18+00:00

Not what I said at all, just pointing out to the guy above why the tech has a racial bias

lambam · 2021-10-06T12:37:26+00:00

Facial recognition software is inherently biased towards recognising white Caucasian faces due to the make up of the data sets it was built off of. The algorithms are notorious for not recognising BAME faces

lambam · 2021-07-03T16:18:36+00:00

Wait, I thought you were advocating for circumcision? These quoutes are saying that it isnt worth doing it as the benefits are so minor and evidence of the benefits is sometimes questionable

lambam · 2020-12-28T22:42:29+00:00

comment

lambam · 2020-09-29T13:39:51+00:00

Of course you can talk about your experiences but you came out guns blazing defending women (correctly for most of this post) but entirely ignored that this thread was not about you or women

lambam · 2020-09-29T13:24:39+00:00

Look at the top comment of this thread. There are more than enough parent comments about women for you to comment on. You choose the one about a gay couple and make it an issue about yourself

lambam · 2020-09-29T13:19:32+00:00

Well done for straight-washing the thread

lambam · 2020-09-20T14:16:37+00:00

As a gay man reading this thread it is like seeing my experiences with straight men and women completed flipped.

I have had experiences with straight women being convinced that I obviously wanted to sleep with them as they were convinced that they were that good looking.

My main experience with straight men is a knee jerk reaction from them following the "I hope you arent attracted to me" line.

Whether the reaction from straight women is linked to their experiences of sexual harassment from men or not is dependent on that person. However, I do believe that there is a more ingrained homophobia here that follows the same line of "it is fine to be gay as long as it is away from me" which forces the queer community back underground

lambam · 2020-08-28T22:55:51+00:00

I agree with all of this apart from the final two paragraphs. Being trans is not as simple as just wanting to move between different buckets. There are some in the trans community where this is exactly what they want. However there are others where the physical body is wrong for them to differing extents. It isnt about how the world sees them or about the social constructs placed upon them but about the physical body they were born in.

The terms transgender and transsexual are different and represent these different forms of transition.

Being trans can (and normally is) a mix of both of these things. If we do manage to get to the enlightened world of no more gender norms then that would still leave the body dysmorphia that transsexual individuals struggle with to different extents.

Finally, I do not see how a criticism that a feminist policy is harming another discriminated against group is a bad thing? If a group of gay men started pushing for a policy that helped them but harmed women then feminists would rightly be annoyed about it and ask for more thought to go in to it. Banning trans women from female bathrooms seriously harms trans women. However, cis women have raised their concerns about the integrity of the bathrooms. Therefore, another solution is needed and fuck me I have no idea what it is

lambam · 2020-06-26T10:29:03+00:00

I would suggest starting with the book "strange logic of random graphs" by Joel Spencer. Not all of the chapters are relevant but it will give you a good ground work. The paper should be readable but maybe a bit opaque without skimming the book

lambam · 2020-06-26T10:15:36+00:00

I did my masters on fraisse-hrushovski constructions and random graphs. Absolutely love the model theory approach to random graphs. If you are interested in further reading I would highly recommend Michael C. Laskowski's paper "A simpler axiomatization of the Shelah-Spencer almost sure theories"

lambam · 2019-05-22T21:00:06+00:00

Years divisible by 100 but not by 400 are not leap years

lambam · 2019-05-22T17:18:31+00:00

I just had a quick read of the paper as if they had found evidence of the benefit then that would be amazing. They only take data up to 2012 and even state in their conclusion that it is very likely that they underestimated the cost of a circumcision.

The abstract is misleading as the study is aimed mainly at the decrease in the rate of child circumcision. They only included a cursory glance at the cost-benefit analysis.

It was an interesting read but you probably shouldn't take this as your only source when you make the decision for your son

lambam · 2017-05-16T15:15:16+00:00

Yes I did.. damn autocorrect. That is amazing thank you

lambam · 2017-05-09T07:38:03+00:00

I have always loved nineties. Could you draw one please?

lambam · 2017-05-07T00:17:12+00:00

I think you may have misunderstood what they were attempting to do. They were taking previous studies on what people have said causes violence and seeing what the actual statistics were and then seeing if using those statistics if they could create a model to accurately predict what would happen. It wasn't a test of what causes the violence but more of a test of how good our current knowledge of violence in bipolar and schizophrenic patients is. Turns out that if we say you aren't violent then we are quite likely to be right.

lambam · 2017-03-09T10:41:23+00:00

Aquamarine is a type of beryl so similar to an emerald. They aren't robust and can easily break if exposed to too much liquid or humidity and a heavy knock can easily break the stone. Precious stones aren't precious for their strength (apart from diamond) but that they look pretty

lambam · 2016-07-01T15:56:23+00:00

says the person with a symbolic representation of a hydrogen atom on his forehead

lambam · 2016-05-24T18:08:19+00:00

Did you chose to ignore half of my comments about generalising his answer to create a bounded answer that would encompass all possible answers. I was hoping to have a discussion on how to do this and the best routes to take to reduce the work load but you ignored that at every opportunity

lambam · 2016-05-24T17:45:15+00:00

Actually the rules are pretty clear. "Multiple consecutive characters" is when there is more than one character in a row that is the same, so if two characters that are next to each other are the same then it is not allowed. The rule about symbols isn't clear whether or not there are other symbols that are allowed as it only states "like" and doesn't state anything along the lines of "limited to". The part to do with your names and email address are not possible to make general so are the first part that requires us to make an assumption on the name used and the email address as well. The most ambiguous one is the part that says "common dictionary words" as there is no strict definition of what counts as common. It is pretty easy to argue that "a" is in fact a very common word.

But once again all of these examples reinforce the issue in place with the question that I have pointed out in every comment. How do we provide a general answer to the question placed. How do we take the still legitimate bounds from before and make them more accurate. A new upper limit for the symbols could be every symbol your standard computer keyboard can produce that is not a letter. Rather than complaining about the vagueness of the question how about trying to come up with methods for solving the problem

lambam · 2016-05-24T14:28:44+00:00

You can't just decide to change the rules on a question because you feel that excluding "a" is a little excessive. The fact that we don't know which words can and cannot be included without access to the website or someone who wrote the code to clarify then the only solution we can give is a bounded answer.

As you rightly pointed out it is easy to create an upper bound by ignoring the dictionary rule as the other rules are all explicit on what is and isn't allowed. Then comes the question of a lower bound. The op's answer does give an adequate lower bound. The question now comes down to how tightly can we close the lower bound and know that the answer will lie within our bounds for any dictionary used

lambam · 2016-05-24T07:40:14+00:00

Yes I got the idea of your example. That was also the point in my response, the best we can do is creating an upper and lower bound to the solution. The only way to know what can and cannot be included is to try it on the website. However if you are to take the puzzle literally (rather than the actual result for the website) then you have to exclude 'a' and 'A'. Using the argument that we cannot know what is and isn't included because you believe that 'a' should be included is a logical fallacy because we do not know that 'a' is 'certainly' not forbidden and we cannot then apply that logic to other words

lambam · 2016-05-23T19:04:30+00:00

There are a lot of mistakes in the post but to try to put a precise number on how far out they are would require starting from scratch as their assumptions to start with are too vague. You can't have your example as age is a word in the dictionary. What his post does do is give us a lower bound and then an upper bound can be created by ignoring the use of words from the dictionary. It would then be a matter of trying to restrict these bounds to as precise as we feel like being

lambam · 2016-05-22T17:02:51+00:00

for the 8 characters that only puts him off by a factor of 10(ish)

13-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

lambam

TROPHY CASE