> (Aside: I am intentionally sticking with U. S. customary units of pounds, miles, etc., to be consistent with much of the related literature.)
From the article, it sounds like dietary science in the US is done with imperial units. It was written by an American for a primarily American audience. Americans track their weight in pounds. Those seem like pretty good reasons to not use metric to me.
Especially with how close the precinct station is to Cal Anderson. We're talking ~3 blocks. Maybe it's a case of understaffing and/or suboptimal allocation of officers? I imagine Pike from 12th down past Broadway becomes a primary focus later at night. I imagine that's when most crime in Cal Anderson occurs. Time-of-day data would be awesome in this set.
My understanding is that dumbwaiters and laundry chutes fall under a fire code which boils down to "Nah, dude. Don't do that" just about everywhere. Vertical passages are great for fires, and bad for people who like not being on fire.
There are complicated ways of doing this, but the naïve way is as follows:
First you need a corpus of text that's grammatically correct
Each node in the chain is a word or piece of punctuation. Each word has a certain probability of being followed by every other word in the corpus, including itself. There are a few different ways to start the sentence. One approach is to start from the node for the punctuation mark ".", and only selecting a following node that is not a period, since sentences don't tend to start with punctuation. From there, use a random number generator to pick a following node based on your probability matrix, rinse, repeat.
If you'll notice, there's no guarantee that it will be grammatically correct. There's just some statistical likelihood that it will be.
My big takeaway from the Chomsky quote is that it's useless to ask if computers can think because one of the fundamental properties we associate with thinking is some biological/spiritual aspect. For a computer to "think", we'd need to redefine what we mean by think. And if we have to redefine what it means to think, why bother hailing it as an accomplishment to make a computer "think". The properties are incredibly important to our understanding of the world. The fact that we have different words for "think", "compute", and "calculate" gives some insight into the value we assign to the distinction as a culture. If those differentiations didn't exist, the problem of simulating cognition wouldn't change. What would change is our perception of the problem. If thinking, calculation, and computation all share the same word, it becomes a question of degrees of "thinking" rather than substantially different processes.
I don't think Chomsky is trying to elevate certain things outside of the laws of nature. He's describing how what we choose to differentiate changes our fundamental perceptions of those things. Submarines could "swim". They could also "read", but those words have a very specific set of properties associated with them.
The term "hipster" has become more or less a catch-all for words such as
* pretentious
* egotistical
* artsy
* self-involved
* preachy
* irreverent
* trendy
and many many more. My favorite thing about the linguistic history of "hipster" is that it started out defined as "one who is hip", but has come to describe both the hip person and the hipness itself. Phrases like "hipster shoes" or "hipster band" come to mind.
While the name "Uncle Tom" comes from the book, the character of Uncle Tom from ~1865 onwards was portrayed almost exclusively in minstrel show retellings of the novel. Minstrel show's didn't quite... capture the anti-slavery sentiments of the book [1].
The novel's Uncle Tom was resistant to the harsher institutions of slavery, sometimes standing in vocal opposition to his masters. The minstrel show Uncle Tom was almost exclusively played by white men in black face, going for cheap laughs by exaggerating the perceived mannerisms of American blacks. Essentially, the novel was radical, progressive and extremely popular. In the process of turning it into a minstrel show, everything radical and progressive was stripped out and replaced with cheap, comfortable laughs for an audience with a concept of how black people are "supposed" to act.
And that's how people who have just read Uncle Tom's Cabin don't get why Uncle Tom is now an epithet for people perceived to be subservient, or cooperating with their oppressors.
I haven't read any books specifically on this topic, but it's a fairly common thing in non-academic (and sometimes academic) discussions of history. There's a subreddit, http://reddit.com/r/badhistory, that spends a lot of time picking apart bad historical arguments from around the web. Just as often as not, I'd say, the issue with the history is just as much trying to apply modern morality and societal norms to a culture completely removed from the modern day as it is factual inaccuracies.
It's not exactly a rigorous explanation of the phenomenon, but it is a good set of case studies.
Also, it should be noted that using modern concepts in a historical setting is not always "wrong" or "bad history". It's pretty clear the author of this article chose to describe Grosseteste the way they did to simplify his work for a broader audience.
I love this. Do you happen to know of any good reading materials on pre-Enlightenment or even pre-printing press scientific history? It gets boring hearing that there was no academic advancement from the fall of the Roman Empire until Galileo.
Partly, it has to do with the role of the church pre-enlightenment. The modern secular university didn't exist in the 13th Century. The concept of a teaching body that granted degrees, certifications, and did research was barely off the ground with things like the University of Paris and the Thing Which Would Become Oxford University. The scientific method didn't exist as any formal process. If you wanted to spend your life thinking, you didn't have too many vocational options outside of the church.
As to his role as a "scientist, philosopher, mathematician, theologian", that's more a projection of modern concepts onto a historical figure. There wasn't nearly as much siloing of various intellectual pursuits. There were just secrets of Nature to be discovered, and people looking to discover them.
I think the second reason you listed to be much more compelling than the first. It could be argued that the space race was about ensuring that the US had missile superiority over the USSR, but I'd wager a significant number of the aeronautical engineers and astronauts involved were much more interested in going to the moon because it was there.
@moron4hire: It's a good point. But there are side effects of reducing residential property. What happens to the city's economy when everyone's commute is doubled because housing in the city is becoming prohibitively expensive as supply shrinks? Without zoning laws, how do you attract people to move to your city when there's no guarantee their apartment building will still be an apartment building once the lease is up?
To answer the question, I think it's the city government's job to balance the interests of people and businesses that reside in the city. In a perfect world, every side effect and externality would be neatly quantifiable, and municipal leadership would be fair and evenhanded. For now, we have to trust that the feedback loop of election will produce pretty good solutions to problems. I can't think of a better way to approach things in the current system.
I think she's taking the position that there's inherent value in providing affordable residential property in New York which exceeds the value in extracting maximum tax revenue from every square inch of the city. At the very least, I find that to be a defensible position.
I think this is where the argument for short term whole-residence rentals breaks down.
In the beginning, Airbnb was for homeowners and renters to provide a spare bedroom to travelers. In that case, they're facilitating a private transaction between two individuals to exchange money for a place to crash. By the residents staying at the home for the duration of the guest's stay, it's hard to call that a sublet, and there's a very strong argument to be made that it's just a communications platform to link either side of a marketplace.
But the case of whole-home rentals gets murkier. I don't see how letting someone stay in your home while you're living somewhere else is anything but a sublet. And if it is a sublet, why should it not have to conform to the established rules for sublets?
I find it disappointing that the Airbnb team hasn't done much in the way of explaining this point. When they do address the legality of Airbnb, they almost always refer to the first case. It's understandable, as it's a much more easily defensible position. I'd be interested to hear someone from Airbnb directly address the possibility of their service being used to turn residential spaces into commercial spaces (in the form of hotels).
The "graph moving in the right direction" doesn't have to be impressive in absolute terms. If I can prove that I have 100 paying, engaged customers this week, 50 last week, 25 the week before, etc. I've proved that the idea resonates with a market, and its growing. Note that this is still early stage. You have to be able to prove some indication of longterm value though.
I can't possibly recommend Rdio enough. The design is simple and intuitive. State transfers nicely between devices.
Even little things are pleasantly surprising. If I have my laptop hooked up to speakers at a party playing through Rdio, I can change the song from my phone.
The only thing it doesn't have that I'd like is Grooveshark-esque queue building. Every music player could just lift Grooveshark's queueing system wholesale and everyone would be much happier.
From the article, it sounds like dietary science in the US is done with imperial units. It was written by an American for a primarily American audience. Americans track their weight in pounds. Those seem like pretty good reasons to not use metric to me.