I think you're missing the point of the question which seems to get at whether the interviewee is familiar with/understands bayesian probability. For an excellent explanation you should see: http://yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes.
I don't see why knowledge of Bayesian probability is necessary for this question. I don't have anything more than a passing knowledge of Bayesian probability, but I was able to produce the correct answer and a reasonable explanation using what I believe to be classical probability: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7001288
I'm also trying to find a data only plan. I know verizon offers data only for iPad.. I wonder if there is anyway to sign up for that and hack an iPhone to use it?
I certainly don't know enough to say but I imagine someone here might.
I bought my iPhone (3GS) in France when I lived there. I signed up for a 1 year contract and cancelled it after 10 months, no penalty because I was leaving the country. Bouyges unlocked my phone without any hassle.
When I got home (US) I bought an iPad with AT&T 3G and put that SIM card into the 3GS. I had to install a special profile to make everything work, but that was all it took for a data-only 'phone' plan.
It's a bit klunky. I make calls with an app called Talkatone, and the quality when I'm on 3G gets very bad. It's better at home and work over wifi, but some friends still complain about sound quality and lag.
Especially considering how poor the knock-off Indian domestic reprints are. Everything is smudgy and looks like it was printed on newsprint (either standard or glossy -- it varies), without trimmed edges and with a horrifically bad binding.
IMO, while it's nice to own a copy of a book that looks good and doesn't fall apart, the awful thing here is not the cosmetics but the fact that the copy is a mangled-up version with errors that have been fixed in editions over a decade ago.
You need to be able to trust a book. I received a misprint of a book I ordered online once, duplicate pages, missed half a chapter. I didn't need that particular chapter for the course I was taking then, and it was a week before the exam so I didn't send it back, it's a really cool book (Computational Geometry) that, like other interesting study books, I would pick up again and browse occasionally, if it weren't for this mess up. It's a shame, really.
"JonSkeptic"..not surprised by the sentiment of your comment.
I think it is feasible..certainly not in all cities and maybe not in any established cities..but some small cities could implement such a solution. That or entirely new cities could be created with this design.
Just require cars to be parked when entering city limits and traded for a golf cart or Segway or something of the sort. The boundaries could be expanded as the city grows if the idea was popular..
An incremental alternative would be to impose a congestion tax for people who choose to drive their cars into the city. The tax would create an incentive not to drive and could be used to fund things like transit and bike sharing.
Even if you start designing new small cities to accommodate no automobiles, you will not be able to eliminate automobiles outside those cities, nor will you be able to force everyone to live in them.
You'd basically just be building a car-less retirement community and hope that young people opt into it.
Build light rail in existing cities, build parking lots for people who need to drive to a light rail station, and start charging a toll for people who drive in places where light rail could take them. Slowly but surely you can turn a city built around cars into a city built around public transit. This is possible in small and large cities and would reduce congestion, pollution, and the danger to pedestrians and cyclists.
Why 29? Is it easier to resist persuasive measures when you are older or younger than 29? Seems pretty irrelevant to me.
I think it's fairly obvious Obama used "29 year old" to imply immaturity and chip away at his credibility thereby. (esp since he is 30 now, surprising how different "30 year old hacker" sounds than "29 year old hacker"..)
Snowden surely knows more about various aspects of spycraft and national-security-coercive-techniques than I and many other older people.... both from his Army training and later jobs. But still, extra awareness and wariness comes with age.
Holding other things constant, an older Snowden would be relatively more likely to have...
• ...known what kinds of tricks and pressures (including non-consensual drugged interrogation) he might be subjected to
• ...received official training, initial or refresher, in resistance
• ...planned well for worst-case outcomes, like not being able to stay above-ground in law-and-order Hong Kong, but rather winding up at the mercy of Russia
I don't know for sure whether in general, older or younger people are better at resisting interrogation. I suspect the 'dark arts' for coercing compliance have evolved over a longer term than any person's lifetime, and prey on any one person's limited experience, so I tend to think they'll work better with the younger... but it's an interesting question.
I do suspect an older person would be more likely to protect himself beforehand, for example by not traveling with the most truly US-interest-damaging data, or encrypting data with a better cipher, or even encrypting data in a way he couldn't, alone under coercion, decrypt.
replying here since I can't figure out how to PM.. On the food scale under How-To Guide you spelled 'suspicion' incorrectly. BTW, love the idea! Plan on digging into it when I get home this evening! Just wanted to give you a heads up on that spelling :)
I really don't think there's a big conspiracy with them. I think the article correctly identified them as members of a private security firm, but I really just think the city authorities hired them to assist with protecting the race, which probably explains why one of them appeared to be walking around with a radiation detector.
I don't understand how already having a suspect in custody makes this release of photos a logical move to flush out the co-conspirator. Maybe I'm slow..
Because if the conspirators have agreed to maintain radio silence until a given point, the assertion that the FBI is still looking for two suspects could lead the non-captured conspirator to assume that the first conspirator is just continuing to lay low.
As to why release the photos at all...well, it might not be to flush him out directly, but just that the FBI really is hoping that the public will be able to identify the uncaptured conspirator.
