E: The transparency page might be of interest to you: https://cock.li/transparency/
Or possibly you'd want to hear about the time the servers got seized: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10774152 && https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10912524
Someone could, but does anyone dare to? Airports have a ton of CCTV cameras.
I mean, do you actually hear yourself? Really listen to yourself and describe what you hear.
Stupid and dangerous. You know these are the people who protect you from all manner of sabotage and manipulation from foreign nations right?
You need to have python 3 for the library to work.
You can Check your python version by typing
It seems You have 2.7,I really recommend you move to 3.6,it's much more Stable and fast!
It kind of felt like they are building a product for no one in my opinion. It is almost as if they are using it as a breeding grounds for new technology in FreeBSD instead of building a stable operating system. If they're trying to use FreeBSD to make something for the average user, do they really care about all these features? I kind of feel like they have been trying to integrate too many new things all at once and it is left things very fragile. I think they should focus on stability instead of trying to integrate so many new things at once. Hopefully this is all just due to them switching to a rolling release model and things will stabilize. I ended up switching to vanilla FreeBSD, maybe I'll give TrueOS another shot once things have settled down.
Encrypt them with spacefiller data and start crossing borders, and then refuse to provide passwords and abandon them for sheer amusement.
Way more fun than recycling old laptops and batteries. And better than planning to travel empty handed, in anticipation of getting ripped off by pesky customs guards.
This would be funny if it wasn't so sad - I agree with erentz, plus I would add that with spending on R&D a fraction of what is normal in a developed country, it's not going to get better.
Not so bad for outsourcing - very low pay, lack of opportunity, average but adequate education and student debt means quite a bit of programming talent is available.
Hopefully other and fundamentally newer ways to fight infection will be found. In the mean time getting fit and healthy now seems like a slightly wiser choice than it already was.
When the government has been lying to you for years about domestic spying, among other things, how do you expect them to follow you blindly on another deal made in the dark?
This country is going to go into chaos in the next ~10-25 years as more and more jobs are automated, unemployment skyrockets, and people refuse to give free money to all the "entitled white heroin users in the Rust Belt." Notwithstanding the effects of global warming ramping up.
Except because of the elitism we get to start this period with Donald Trump at the helm instead of someone at least half sane.
It's not clear that this is doing much more than finding drugs similar to the training drugs in the new dataset. Given that a large part of pharmaceutical/chemical development is based on slightly modifying existing compounds, it is not obvious that this adds much to the discovery pipeline, or that it is robust to false positives (drugs that have similar "fingerprints" to those seen in training set but are part of a large class of chemicals that mostly don't fight cancer and are therefore unlikely to appear in the small training set of possible cancer-fighting compounds).
Fundamentally machine learning works better with large data. It is hard to believe that training on 6000 chemicals, given the overall diversity in chemical space (~72 million chemicals in the dataset they're indexing) is likely to lead to a real "understanding" of what constitutes a cancer-fighting drug as opposed to parroting existing drugs they're trained on.
The effort from Ryan P. Adams' group (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.02415v2.pdf) is I think more reasonable because it trains on larger sets of chemicals, and is also truly generative in the sense of being able to create new chemicals as opposed to signatures "similar to" existing ones. Though I should note that they also had trouble generating plausible chemical structures despite a larger training set.
We almost had the regulatory state imposed at an international level. Good riddance.