Ha!!!

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1919

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2017/01/24/driverless-cars-are-coming/

Here are analyses and data about driverless cars drawn from recent Brookings research.

William Julius Wilson has done some really good work on this topic…

https://daily.jstor.org/inner-city-myths-and-realities/

Not "alternate facts".

http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/federal-employment-at-record-lows-as-a-share-of-employment-populationyet

https://theconversation.com/why-ups-drivers-dont-turn-left-and-you-probably-shouldnt-either-71432

UPS have designed their vehicle routing software to eliminate as many left-hand turns as possible (in countries with right-hand traffic). Typically, only 10% of the turns are left turns. As a result, the company claims it uses 10m gallons less fuel, emits 20,000 tonnes less carbon dioxide and delivers 350,000 more packages every year. The efficiency of planning routes with its navigation software this way has even helped the firm cut the number of trucks it uses by 1,100, bringing down the company’s total distance travelled by 28.5m miles – despite the longer routes.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-machines-are-coming-for-poker/

For the past few decades, humans have ceded thrones to artificial intelligence in games of all kinds. In 1995, a program called Chinook won a man vs. machine world checkers championship. In 1997, Garry Kasparov, probably the best (human) chess player of all time, lost a match to an IBM computer called Deep Blue. In 2007, checkers was “solved,” mathematically ensuring that no human would ever again beat the best machine.1 In 2011, Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter were routed on “Jeopardy!” by another IBM creation, Watson. And last March, a human champion of Go, Lee Sedol, fell to a Google program in devastating and bewildering fashion.

Poker may be close to all we have left. Computers have yet to beat humans in a major no-limit competition like this. “I think of it as the last frontier within the visible horizon,” an eager Tuomas Sandholm said as we sat at an empty poker table.

Interesting presentation on the Trolley problem.

https://vimeo.com/199613170

The authors point out that we can’t assume causality and have a possible (good) explanation for why there’s a difference.

https://theconversation.com/are-third-party-candidates-spoilers-what-voting-data-reveal-71065

http://www.openculture.com/2016/05/how-to-spot-bullshit-a-primer-by-princeton-philosopher-harry-frankfurt.html

Frankfurt–a philosopher at Princeton and the author of On Bullshit—allows that bullshit artists are often charming, or at their very least, colorful. They have to be. Achieving their ends involves engaging others long enough to persuade them that they know what they’re talking about, when in fact, that’s the opposite of the truth.

Speaking of opposites, Frankfurt maintains that bullshit is a different beast from an out-and-out lie. The liar makes a specific attempt to conceal the truth by swapping it out for a lie.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/12/evolution-of-technology/
Nearly nine-in-ten Americans today are online, up from about half in the early 2000s. Pew Research Center has chronicled this trend and others through more than 15 years of surveys on internet and technology use.