They should be running up and down the rows looking for perfectly ripe fruit with an array of sensors, not taking 90% in one pass.
Depends on the fruit. Most apples and pears you do pick all the fruit at once as it ripens fairly evenly, though even in that case you could do the sorting (colour and size) on the tree though it is probably more efficient to do it at the packing house. Soft fruits such as peaches, plums and cherries do need to be spot picked and in the case of peaches, it is actually a feel thing as well as colour. I went fruit picking here in BC back in the early '80's and could make up to $200 a day (average was closer to $100) which wasn't bad money 35 years ago. There were no Mexicans, it was locals, young people from eastern Canada, especially Quebec and young people from Europe working illegally. Now they probably still pay the same and I understand the farmers import pickers from Central America, paying airfare and housing and $15+ an hour for the 6 months that they're here on the foreign workers visa. If the prices had gone up with inflation, they'd probably have no problem with finding workers, especially if they let tourists work. Of course the killer was the small BC orchidist having to compete with the Washington factory farm that probably got government aid as well as a blind eye turned to the desperate Mexicans doing the picking. Sure hope that Trump does kick out the Mexicans and stop the government welfare programs to the industrial farms so our farms can compete and people can pay a realistic price for food, at least until the robots are perfected and their price comes down to where the small farmer can afford them.
You mean the country that believes free speech and other rights stop at their border? A country that has most of the worlds prisoners in its prisons? A country that has privatized their prisons to make sure the prisoners are treated like shit and tortured? A country that glories in executing people slowly? A country that routinely invades other countries and destabilizes large areas? A country that never keeps its word? A country that responds to a crook running for election by finding even a bigger one?
When is the last time in your life that a major power threatened to invade a much small country (Or "province" if you are European and buy China's bs line on this) simply because that other country wouldn't bow down to it in obedience?
Well if you include actually invading as well as threatening, then my whole life has seen America, a major power, threatening or actually invading much smaller countries that wouldn't bow down in obedience. Examples range from most countries in Central America (especially Cuba) to Afghanistan, who wouldn't extradite someone without any evidence.
Well, if you don't think there is any benefit to living on the lands that were previously owned by the Natives, you could always go back to Europe or wherever.
Many of the treaties basically say forever (as long as the Sun shines kind of time frames) and the American Constitution puts treaties pretty high in the law. A deal is a deal and the people who traded a few beads for most of the natives land have done pretty good.
The best restaurants will have human waiters. Butlers are already a fast increasing occupation, seems Chinese billionaires really like having a trained English (well white anyways) butler.Just like in the days of the Luddites, servants will be a status symbol and will be a source of employment for a small percentage of the population. Remember only losers are served by robots.
Actually it was 70 years, 3 generations, after the Luddites before employment came up. It was made worse due to the Parliamentarians enclosing the commons (through the passing of bills) which forced a lot of farmers of the land and into the cities. On the other hand it was made better by there being the new world for people to immigrate too, sometimes even voluntarily. No argument with the rest of your post besides that the current trend of decreasing the work force by demanding higher and higher education, at the students expense, will likely continue to keep young people in school and out of the workforce. A trend that started a hundred years ago, though forcing the students to go into debt is recent.
Considering how much safer automobiles have become over the last 10 years, having the fatality rate not improve does not say that smartphone use has had negligible affects.
So someone who believes the Federal government should only be involved in national defense, and not in education, environmental protection, labor protection, farm subsidies, health care, retirement funding, communications (including Internet), roads and highways, regulation of banks and the market, etc.
A couple of the above clearly come under the interstate commerce clause. Then there is the postal clause and the question about when the post becomes electronic. It's a shame you Americans refuse to keep your Constitution up to date.
Actually the CIA for the most part isn't bound by the Constitution. The CIA's mission is to protect American interests abroad, where the Constitution doesn't apply.
And this is the problem with America today. The Constitution obviously applied to the federal government (expanded with the 14th to all government) and the rights, except political rights such as voting, apply to "The People", not just Americans nor do those rights disappear just because someone is not in the country. Same with the restrictions, Congress is banned from creating laws limiting speech, not just limiting American speech, and all these laws about secrecy are also obviously an infringement on the 1st. Yet keep seeing that too many Americans don't care that their government is infringing rights all over the world. Murder is murder whether it is an American citizen or not.
So find someone that believes you have no privacy since the constitution does not ever say privacy. Reading in privacy rights is "reinterpreting" the document. Expanding the listed classifications is "reinterpreting" it.
So what is the point of the 4th amendment if not to protect privacy?
The problem is when the line is drawn to make some special interest group happy rather then based on reality. Drunk driving laws for example, the legal limit here seems to get lowered every time some cute girl is ran over by someone who was pissed drunk. Does smelling a wine cork really turn you into a bad driver? Does lowering the legal limit really stop someone who ignored the limit previously? Likewise, are some young woman in certain countries/states really less capable of consenting?
It wasn't that long ago that the age of consent was raised from 14 to 16 (misremembered as 13-15) here and a 14 yr old can still legally consent to sex with a 19 yr old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Rape cases often do involve trying to find out if the victim actually consented or not, though I don't think it is the jury doing the asking.
Why would fucking a 15 yr old be rape? I guess if you're in a position of authority, you can abuse that but the idea that in some places a 15 yr old can't consent while in other places a 13 yr old can consent seems arbitrary. Same with the idea that a small woman who had one glass of wine no longer being able to consent. Pissed drunk, I can see but it is still a fuzzy line
Hate to break it to you, but you need internet to get a job at McDonalds, though using the computers at the library might be good enough if they're not too locked down.
And yet America has way more problems with politicians playing "game of throne" games then Canada even though our country was designed to have a strong central government after watching the train wreck that the American Civil War was. Here the internet is considered a vital service that should be available to everyone who is willing to pay the going rate, and we have net neutrality. Just having ancient arseholes in charge of so much stuff seems to be a recipe for shit like this. Elders are important and should be listened to and their words carefully and respectfully considered, but to put them in charge? Same with the idea of putting billionaires in charge, as if they're going to look after the common person rather then other billionaires.
What about anyone trying to get a job? Most places here on backwater, hickville NY don't even have paper applications anymore. Should I apply for welfare because I dont HAVE to use the Internet?
Soon you'll need the internet to apply for welfare
Doesn't the neutron interact via the strong force as well? Even the neutrino interacts via the weak force whereas dark matter might not even do that. As you imply, lots of particles don't interact via electromagnetism which might be similar to dark matter. I don't understand the hate/disbelief that dark matter gets as it isn't that different and would be interesting if it exists.
Why would future physicists laugh at us. Anyone with any understanding doesn't laugh at aether as it was a good, though wrong, explanation of the properties of light and seemed more believable then the idea of an absolute speed limit and light traveling at the same speed no matter your frame of reference, which really did sound like a fantasy.
So like much of physics. Neutrinos were postulated to balance the fusion equations and the idea of particles that didn't interact and could travel right through the Earth was laughed at. Previously the idea of electrons to explain electricity and much else.
This Apr 1st, the stories all seemed to be actually true with slightly warped headlines and such subjects as that they all seemed to be hoaxes. (Only actually checked a couple)
We already have an example of weakly interacting matter, namely the neutrino, a particle BTW, that was first postulated to balance some equations (fusion) and then later found in the wild.
Slashdot Mirror
They should be running up and down the rows looking for perfectly ripe fruit with an array of sensors, not taking 90% in one pass.
Depends on the fruit. Most apples and pears you do pick all the fruit at once as it ripens fairly evenly, though even in that case you could do the sorting (colour and size) on the tree though it is probably more efficient to do it at the packing house. Soft fruits such as peaches, plums and cherries do need to be spot picked and in the case of peaches, it is actually a feel thing as well as colour.
I went fruit picking here in BC back in the early '80's and could make up to $200 a day (average was closer to $100) which wasn't bad money 35 years ago. There were no Mexicans, it was locals, young people from eastern Canada, especially Quebec and young people from Europe working illegally. Now they probably still pay the same and I understand the farmers import pickers from Central America, paying airfare and housing and $15+ an hour for the 6 months that they're here on the foreign workers visa.
If the prices had gone up with inflation, they'd probably have no problem with finding workers, especially if they let tourists work. Of course the killer was the small BC orchidist having to compete with the Washington factory farm that probably got government aid as well as a blind eye turned to the desperate Mexicans doing the picking. Sure hope that Trump does kick out the Mexicans and stop the government welfare programs to the industrial farms so our farms can compete and people can pay a realistic price for food, at least until the robots are perfected and their price comes down to where the small farmer can afford them.
You mean the country that believes free speech and other rights stop at their border? A country that has most of the worlds prisoners in its prisons? A country that has privatized their prisons to make sure the prisoners are treated like shit and tortured? A country that glories in executing people slowly? A country that routinely invades other countries and destabilizes large areas? A country that never keeps its word? A country that responds to a crook running for election by finding even a bigger one?
When is the last time in your life that a major power threatened to invade a much small country (Or "province" if you are European and buy China's bs line on this) simply because that other country wouldn't bow down to it in obedience?
Well if you include actually invading as well as threatening, then my whole life has seen America, a major power, threatening or actually invading much smaller countries that wouldn't bow down in obedience. Examples range from most countries in Central America (especially Cuba) to Afghanistan, who wouldn't extradite someone without any evidence.
Not quite completely, which is why posters such as the above want to violate the last few that are still standing.
Well, if you don't think there is any benefit to living on the lands that were previously owned by the Natives, you could always go back to Europe or wherever.
Many of the treaties basically say forever (as long as the Sun shines kind of time frames) and the American Constitution puts treaties pretty high in the law. A deal is a deal and the people who traded a few beads for most of the natives land have done pretty good.
I'm sure there will be similar jobs that the 80-90% can compete for. Remember, if you're unemployed, it must be a moral failure on your part.
The best restaurants will have human waiters. Butlers are already a fast increasing occupation, seems Chinese billionaires really like having a trained English (well white anyways) butler.Just like in the days of the Luddites, servants will be a status symbol and will be a source of employment for a small percentage of the population.
Remember only losers are served by robots.
Actually it was 70 years, 3 generations, after the Luddites before employment came up. It was made worse due to the Parliamentarians enclosing the commons (through the passing of bills) which forced a lot of farmers of the land and into the cities. On the other hand it was made better by there being the new world for people to immigrate too, sometimes even voluntarily.
No argument with the rest of your post besides that the current trend of decreasing the work force by demanding higher and higher education, at the students expense, will likely continue to keep young people in school and out of the workforce. A trend that started a hundred years ago, though forcing the students to go into debt is recent.
Considering how much safer automobiles have become over the last 10 years, having the fatality rate not improve does not say that smartphone use has had negligible affects.
So someone who believes the Federal government should only be involved in national defense, and not in education, environmental protection, labor protection, farm subsidies, health care, retirement funding, communications (including Internet), roads and highways, regulation of banks and the market, etc.
A couple of the above clearly come under the interstate commerce clause. Then there is the postal clause and the question about when the post becomes electronic. It's a shame you Americans refuse to keep your Constitution up to date.
Actually the CIA for the most part isn't bound by the Constitution. The CIA's mission is to protect American interests abroad, where the Constitution doesn't apply.
And this is the problem with America today. The Constitution obviously applied to the federal government (expanded with the 14th to all government) and the rights, except political rights such as voting, apply to "The People", not just Americans nor do those rights disappear just because someone is not in the country. Same with the restrictions, Congress is banned from creating laws limiting speech, not just limiting American speech, and all these laws about secrecy are also obviously an infringement on the 1st.
Yet keep seeing that too many Americans don't care that their government is infringing rights all over the world. Murder is murder whether it is an American citizen or not.
So find someone that believes you have no privacy since the constitution does not ever say privacy. Reading in privacy rights is "reinterpreting" the document. Expanding the listed classifications is "reinterpreting" it.
So what is the point of the 4th amendment if not to protect privacy?
The problem is when the line is drawn to make some special interest group happy rather then based on reality. Drunk driving laws for example, the legal limit here seems to get lowered every time some cute girl is ran over by someone who was pissed drunk. Does smelling a wine cork really turn you into a bad driver? Does lowering the legal limit really stop someone who ignored the limit previously?
Likewise, are some young woman in certain countries/states really less capable of consenting?
It wasn't that long ago that the age of consent was raised from 14 to 16 (misremembered as 13-15) here and a 14 yr old can still legally consent to sex with a 19 yr old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Rape cases often do involve trying to find out if the victim actually consented or not, though I don't think it is the jury doing the asking.
Why would fucking a 15 yr old be rape? I guess if you're in a position of authority, you can abuse that but the idea that in some places a 15 yr old can't consent while in other places a 13 yr old can consent seems arbitrary.
Same with the idea that a small woman who had one glass of wine no longer being able to consent. Pissed drunk, I can see but it is still a fuzzy line
Might vary by location.
Hate to break it to you, but you need internet to get a job at McDonalds, though using the computers at the library might be good enough if they're not too locked down.
And yet America has way more problems with politicians playing "game of throne" games then Canada even though our country was designed to have a strong central government after watching the train wreck that the American Civil War was. Here the internet is considered a vital service that should be available to everyone who is willing to pay the going rate, and we have net neutrality.
Just having ancient arseholes in charge of so much stuff seems to be a recipe for shit like this. Elders are important and should be listened to and their words carefully and respectfully considered, but to put them in charge? Same with the idea of putting billionaires in charge, as if they're going to look after the common person rather then other billionaires.
What about anyone trying to get a job? Most places here on backwater, hickville NY don't even have paper applications anymore. Should I apply for welfare because I dont HAVE to use the Internet?
Soon you'll need the internet to apply for welfare
Doesn't the neutron interact via the strong force as well? Even the neutrino interacts via the weak force whereas dark matter might not even do that.
As you imply, lots of particles don't interact via electromagnetism which might be similar to dark matter. I don't understand the hate/disbelief that dark matter gets as it isn't that different and would be interesting if it exists.
Good points. Part of the history of physics is a string of better/more accurate measurements.
Why would future physicists laugh at us. Anyone with any understanding doesn't laugh at aether as it was a good, though wrong, explanation of the properties of light and seemed more believable then the idea of an absolute speed limit and light traveling at the same speed no matter your frame of reference, which really did sound like a fantasy.
So like much of physics. Neutrinos were postulated to balance the fusion equations and the idea of particles that didn't interact and could travel right through the Earth was laughed at. Previously the idea of electrons to explain electricity and much else.
This Apr 1st, the stories all seemed to be actually true with slightly warped headlines and such subjects as that they all seemed to be hoaxes. (Only actually checked a couple)
We already have an example of weakly interacting matter, namely the neutrino, a particle BTW, that was first postulated to balance some equations (fusion) and then later found in the wild.