I think it's a difference in expectation. For some reason, people are surprised that birds have the same intelligence level as a human toddler. However no one wants an AI assistant that's as dumb as a toddler.
Jesse had been out of wrestling for years before running for mayor of Brooklyn Park. You have to remember this was back in the late 80,s early 90's when there wasn't any internet or social media. I remember reading an article about him resolving some issue the voters brought to him thinking, "I had no idea the guy was still living in the state, let alone running a city as their mayor."
I will give you he did use his radio show to air his grievances and tell stories about his wrestling years and being a frogman (the precursors to the SEALs) so that did bring him back into the public spotlight. He ironically had always dabbled in politics, and even appeared on Howard Stern saying he was going to run for president with gulp Donald Trump who made a guest appearance with him talking about it when he was governor.
So you're right, by the time he ran for governor, he was back to being very well known and leveraged that to a degree where he had to give up his radio show in order to run for governor.
I'm a third generation "woman in tech" (grandma did punch cards, mom did COBOL) and I haven't had any problems that I keep being told I'm supposed to have. I suspect discrimination is location specific. The most I get is the annoying "you guys..." pause to think "...and gal".
In this context, they are speaking of electrical efficiency, i.e. the amount of power lost to system impedance during transmission, not some abstract concept like effectivity. The efficiency of a transmission line is expressed as a ratio of power received at one end of the line over the power sent at the other.[1]
The cost still matters because if the losses cost less to replace than the superconducting material costs to install, no one will use it. So parents point still stands. It doesn't matter how high the electrical efficiency is, what matters is cost efficiency.
This is only true to a point. Evaluating incremental cost benefits on the basis of the delta of energy loss along specific lines ignores the state change that occurs when main trunk elements of the grid become lossless and energy generation and storage solutions can be deployed in a near-location agnostic manner.
As with all toy models being applied to the real world, there are important factors to model in that aren't immediately obvious.
Who's "they"? If anyone is talking about electrical efficiency they shouldn't be because cost efficiency is what matters for a transmission line. Transmission maintainers have no reason to care if a wire transmits with 100% electrical efficiency if it's cheaper to lose some electricity than pay for the perfectly electrically-efficient wire.
The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that Chatterjee's motives and subsequent termination (which is not elaborated on) was related to gender discrimination. Otherwise I can't see what relevance anyone's genders has on the issue at hand.
It's explained in the Wired article that is linked that this was indeed the cause.
The independent reproduction that the IEEE article talks about also tested the method from the leaked paper from Chatterjee and concluded that his method indeed beats CT in almost all cases at a fraction of the computational cost.
The response from G&M to the independent reproduction emphasizes their method was used for production hardware at Google, was in a peer reviewed paper, and that their GitHub repo had a lot of forks and stars (I'm not making this up). Near the end it then raises several technical objections.
It doesn't look like they didn't train CT to convergence, so idk why anyone would care about those results.
What is even the point of benchmarking against a learning based method of you don't let it finish learning? Quality of output matters way more than compute cost.
I work in embedded, and the place I work restructured to have a dedicated software group. They hired young software engineers and focused on getting people who are good programmers without really caring what they were good at. Most people ended up being web developers and liked webstack.
We were tasked with making a handheld air quality measurement device with a touch screen that could pair with a computer app that we would also write. Most people on the team knew webstack so we decided on a HTML/CSS/JavaScript +SQLite that would run in Electron Chromium on Linux on the physical device.
So what went wrong? Well, electron is bloated for embedded devices and the mid-tier processor we were using chugged so much that it would get hot. Hot enough to affect the temperature sensors at the top of the board and throw off the gas density measurements. Our MVP was nearly done when we discovered this problem.
We had two choices: throw out the hardware or throw out the software. We ended up throwing out the software and starting over (in Winforms + C# if anyone's curious). I and two others quit as a result. It is _really_ depressing redoing something you've already done in a different language.
If we picked the lighter weight framework from the start instead of picking the language most people knew, we wouldn't have lost a year of work.
In the US, it depends on the waste services provider, city, and county. I've had garbage companies that offer compost and yard waste services and some not. Sometimes it's provided through the city or county for free or for a fee, though not everywhere
