Is this sarcasm? Otherwise I'm not sure how that follows. Seems more reasonable to believe that they're hitting walls and switching to PR and productizing.
I find the outlined scenario well argued and plausible.
What's more interesting to me though is the complete lack of mention of labor unions as a potential defense mechanism for engineers (either in the OP or in the conversation here, at least so far).
For a while now I've felt it's quite arrogant and completely naive of us to not accept that we're just keyboard workers, and not rare special flowers that will forever be economically privileged.
my workplace provides paid access to its employees. seems equally absurd like oreilly.com access or research paper platforms that schools sometimes pay for.
they bank on enterprise billing to keep the lights on.
> sometimes you need the excellent dry theory and sometimes you need the more concrete but messy application, and in truth you will always vacillate between the two - this is the former
Fully agree. Axler says it quite clearly that the book is intended for a second course in linear algebra. While not an applied text, I find it close enough that it allows you to subsequently go back to your applied material and see it with new eyes.
I'm actually right now working through this book (3rd edition). It's pretty much the most abstract and most clear and simple maths books I've worked through so far (I'm not a mathematician).
Personally I find it suits my needs perfectly, even though initially it can be intimidating. But once you start getting the hang of it I think it can allow you to build a much deeper intuition for things than a more applied text.
No. But it's reasonable to presume he's a compromised source. That doesn't mean he wants to be, nor that everything he's saying has been dictated to him. But his public communications would be, at the very least, monitored and vetted.
at this point he is at the mercy of his FSB handler, either he posts what he is told/expected to or he loses usefulness and joins Russell 'Texas' Bentley as a cautionary tale.
His continued existance in Russia antagonizes the US Intelligence Community. That itself has value to Russia. Not tremendous value, but value nevertheless.
As other commenters have pointed out in one way or another, the problem seems to actually be that this simplistic model of voter choice can't capture all the structure of the real world that humans can quickly infer from the setup. Things like: state elections have millions of voters, 55/45 is actually a decisive, not a narrow win etc.
In a generic setup, imagine you have a binary classifier that outputs probabilities in the .45-.55 range - likely it won't be a really strong classifier. You would ideally like polarized predictions, not values around .5.
Come to think of it, could this be an issue of non-ergodicity too ( hope I'm using the term right)? i.e. state level prior is not that informative wrt individual vote?
This is not a matter of class balance that much. If you want to predict which of two parties somebody will vote with, the most natural framing is that of binary classification.
For that you need to threshold your predictions. Ideally you'd like your model to generate a bimodal distribution so that you can threshold without many false positives etc.
