I can trust someone who I disagree with. I can also not trust people who I do agree with.
There are many people who I would disagree with on their beliefs and idea, they may try to convince me to follow their logic. But this could be a person who I trust, and they are not trying to mislead me but in their minds correct me in my misguided ways. Outside of the topic that we disagree I would trust them to try to do the right thing. Compared to say a Used Car sales man who will agree with whatever I wan't is a shady guy who is just being agreeable to try to sell me a car. There is much less trust involved there.
Many politicians will ignore science just because they know by not pushing the issue at hand they can get elected by people who do not want to deal with such issues. So by blocking a study in global warming, or hazard in whatever, to keep the truth fuzzy is distrustful. However someone who disagrees with the topic however will allow such studies just to prove that he is right, is more trustful.
Truthful fact can be used to deceive and non truthful information can be used to enlighten.
The trustworthiness of the information lies in the intention. I can take facts and put them out of context or giving them odd weights to them with the intent to deceive people. I could tell a parable not based on actual events to express a point, not for them to believe the actuality of the parable, but the abstract point it was meant to portrait.
Being that our weather system is new rather screwed up. We don't need hurricanes to cause real damage. In the past decade, houses that have been built hundred years ago, are being washed away in creaks that have diverted hundreds of feet due to heavy rain and flooding conditions overnight. Roads have been washed away to become impassible until a major fix and often adding a bridge where there wasn't one before.
Giving out free copies to reviewers only tarnishes the review, because they got it for free, and the pain of price rarely factors into the review.
Lets say I got a game for my PC and it cost me $10.00. And I found it to be enjoyable however the graphics may have some glitches, or its renders were not well done, or had some bad voice acting in it. Vs. the Same game that cost me $40.00. I would be much more harsh on my review of the same game which cost more.
Price really does matter in the review. While it isn't the only factor. As a Free game should still meet some quality standards, however if it worth the expense is indeed a factor.
Having gaming companies giving a free copy to reviewers especially before they have settled on pricing, can give poor quality reviews, which can be unfair to both the company and the readers. A free to play game may get a poor review because the reviewer though it would cost $100. But thought it would be only worth $50. Or that $100 game got a good review only because the reviewer though it was worth $20.00
Why do you think the Real Estate Lobby likes Trump in particular? There are two parts to Real Estate Selling Property, which you cut corners to save on costs but make facades to raise the price. Then Buying Property, where you are trying to find your customer the best building for their money.
Buying a building with green energy compliance is a bonus to the customers. Lower Energy Cost with the upfront cost of the upgrade eaten by the seller. For the Sellers they would like that a bit differently.
Besides a lobby has a hand in any policy that may affect them for good or for bad, so they can get at least some say in what goes on.
After Spectrum bought out Time Warner in my area internet speeds tripled. However this was a deal that started during the Obama era. With promises of faster speed to allow the buyout.
Hard to tell, ISP are for the most part unregulated, so how do we know if we are being throttled, or just their site is slower then others? Being that ISP would want to keep this quite, they probably will make sure not to throttle internet speed tests, heck they may put them on the fast lane. See we sold you 100mbs connection and run these speed tests and you are getting 105mbs.
The reason for Net Neutrality, is because ISP today are rarely just an ISP, but a media conglomerate. So we are using their infrastructure to access competitors, and new technology and sites which may require more bandwidth or different types of connections that the ISP may just not want to do. Because it is expensive.
Public work projects are expensive. While there is a lot of waste that probably can be cleaned up, but often the cost of finding the waste is more expensive then the amount of waste itself. However if you figure a Pot hole that needs to be filled needs the following.
3 People: 2 People to direct traffic on both sides. A person to fill the hole.
So if this process takes 1 hour. This would cost tax payers about $100 just for labor. Then there is management to determine where the potholes are and what priority they need to be fixed, Cost of material, upkeep of equipment...
Sure you could probably get some pavement patch yourself, for $15.00 then fill it yourself for much cheaper. But then you risk getting hit by a car, using patch material that could hurt the road further or cars that drive over it, so you are legally responsible for their damage. Or your skill at such a job will just not meet standards, and make the problem worse.
Why can't people deal with multiple issues? I am not a doctor for that child, I am only a citizen who can vote during a particular time frame and lack the charisma to push for change, I am a technical person, who is good with technology. In terms of priorities in life, I should focus in life on what I can manage and control. If this person can get a clear signal and internet, then it will let him know about the child who is dying (and perhaps he is a doctor who can help), realize that the president is lying, thus push further for change.
We can help in our own ways. Sometimes we are the ones who support the visible forces that cause change.
Still the local channels will often offer timely news and weather, while Netflix will not.
At least in my area, if there is a major weather event it will show its progress even with commercials playing.
In terms of getting immediate updates on local news events and weather. Local TV channels are better then the Internet (Where there is a lag to publish), Radio (Which can only cover one story at once), Print media (a full day delay)
Television is more then just entertainment. And News is more then just global and national politics.
It gets cold in New York. Heating with electricity is still expensive, and inefficient. We get more heat per dollar with actually burning stuff, and heating water and pumping that water around the building.
I use wood pellets during the winter myself, with oil heat as a backup. Then there is electricity of AC in the summer, powering electrics and appliances. Luxury homes tends to have everything ready for your convince. You turn on the Hot Tap, Hot water comes out almost immediately. Rooms are at a comfortable temperature all the time. So you don't walk into an uncomfortable room and wait for it get to the right temperature.
I expect this is mostly political, vs actually trying to save the environment. I am no way a Trump supporter, but this seems to be a political stunt just to hurt the president.
All fine and good. But back in the Z-80 days was it because you hated Microsoft, or that you like the Z-80 Better? Back in the early times, Going with an IBM PC with MS DOS was just as much as a risk as going with any other system. They were a lot of systems faster and cheaper then the IBM PC. But that wasn't from Microsoft messing it up. Just the fact that IBM Made an expensive computer. Because it was build to survive a nuclear Holocaust.
...you mean, a company lied about their products? Inconceivable! FTFY
Until we have some Truth in Advertising laws with teeth, it is still buyer beware.
The key difference is that a reputable company only exaggerates vs lies.
With all that said. Showing off your phone with an ultra-high resolution display on TV and Print will not normally show well or express the quality of the product, so they will normally green screen a doctored image to make the display seem sharp and bright on print, your TV or computer.
Actually it was more due to the PC Clone makers who reverse engineered the IBM Bios. Thus could license MS Dos to work on their systems.
IBM didn't want the OS license because the BIOS was suppose to be the key that locked them in. Microsoft would probably would be happy being the IBM OS.
However being the clone makers were more about empowering alternatives. Once deemed legal, Microsoft was happy to sell them their software.
I have been using Star/Open/Libre office decades. The question about compatibility problems is always what are you expecting to do. If you create a file in LibreOffice I don't see much compatibility. However if going back it may cause some issue, if they are using a brand new feature.
This is a reputation only to the Apple and Linux user base. Who have invested interest in seeing Microsoft getting its comeuppance. The general population for the most part has seen MS rather fondly as the ones who gave them their internet, play their games, and power their businesses. Being that Microsoft was able to keep such a wide range of hardware compatibility and the last 15 years or so of Windows has been able to run so well is actually a testament to its quality. Linux and Apple systems do crash and have problems, which often relate to crappy drivers and poor supported hardware.
Now all that being said. Apple really helped push people to become Apple Zealots last decade, which helped make microsoft seem less of your friend.
If you flag it as good enough and the product is done. Then your R&D team will either be fired or moved onto a different product all together. Risking having your product become outdated, and not having the resources to ramp up and catch up.
Just like phones last decade. Flip Phones, reached what a Flip Phone can do. Smart Phones were dominated by black berry, and each update to blackberry wasn't that big of a deal.
Apple iPhone concept put shock into these companies. Causing them 2 years to rework and revamp their product line, because there was minimal R&D because a phone was a phone, and all was done was change the style.
To paraphrase a TV commercial for an energy bar and Doctor Who.
There is a difference between Nice and Kind. Nice is the person with a big smile who makes you feel good. Kind is working to help someone with their long term goals.
So for example say currently your job is to approve or reject a license, say to build home extensions. You have a large collection of applications to deal with. You could be a perfectly pleasant person, but will rubberstamp reject on the bulk of them. Leaving the requester having no idea on what the next steps are. With this process automated, in the "Kindness Economy" A person would deal with the rejected list, and help the requester out to make sure the rejected reasons are dealt with and addressed so they will be able to put out an acceptable application. This job, may require the person to be tough and tell them the hard news, however that may be needed for the customer to go further.
I was not implying that we force this "Kindness Economy" but more of a prediction of that is where the natural progression probably will be in. And that we should prep for this. Just as my generation had kids learn how to use computers, write simple programs, because back in Gen X, The Computer Revolution (or "Data Economy" ) That we live in now, was only a prediction of things to come, but those pre-boomers and early boomers decided it was a good idea to adapt to this change. As their grandparents prepped them for the industrial revolution.
Slashdot Mirror
I can trust someone who I disagree with. I can also not trust people who I do agree with.
There are many people who I would disagree with on their beliefs and idea, they may try to convince me to follow their logic. But this could be a person who I trust, and they are not trying to mislead me but in their minds correct me in my misguided ways. Outside of the topic that we disagree I would trust them to try to do the right thing.
Compared to say a Used Car sales man who will agree with whatever I wan't is a shady guy who is just being agreeable to try to sell me a car. There is much less trust involved there.
Many politicians will ignore science just because they know by not pushing the issue at hand they can get elected by people who do not want to deal with such issues. So by blocking a study in global warming, or hazard in whatever, to keep the truth fuzzy is distrustful. However someone who disagrees with the topic however will allow such studies just to prove that he is right, is more trustful.
Truthful fact can be used to deceive and non truthful information can be used to enlighten.
The trustworthiness of the information lies in the intention.
I can take facts and put them out of context or giving them odd weights to them with the intent to deceive people.
I could tell a parable not based on actual events to express a point, not for them to believe the actuality of the parable, but the abstract point it was meant to portrait.
But you don't need to buy your Toyota by going on a road owned by General Motors.
Being that our weather system is new rather screwed up. We don't need hurricanes to cause real damage. In the past decade, houses that have been built hundred years ago, are being washed away in creaks that have diverted hundreds of feet due to heavy rain and flooding conditions overnight. Roads have been washed away to become impassible until a major fix and often adding a bridge where there wasn't one before.
Giving out free copies to reviewers only tarnishes the review, because they got it for free, and the pain of price rarely factors into the review.
Lets say I got a game for my PC and it cost me $10.00. And I found it to be enjoyable however the graphics may have some glitches, or its renders were not well done, or had some bad voice acting in it. Vs. the Same game that cost me $40.00. I would be much more harsh on my review of the same game which cost more.
Price really does matter in the review. While it isn't the only factor. As a Free game should still meet some quality standards, however if it worth the expense is indeed a factor.
Having gaming companies giving a free copy to reviewers especially before they have settled on pricing, can give poor quality reviews, which can be unfair to both the company and the readers.
A free to play game may get a poor review because the reviewer though it would cost $100. But thought it would be only worth $50.
Or that $100 game got a good review only because the reviewer though it was worth $20.00
Why do you think the Real Estate Lobby likes Trump in particular?
There are two parts to Real Estate Selling Property, which you cut corners to save on costs but make facades to raise the price. Then Buying Property, where you are trying to find your customer the best building for their money.
Buying a building with green energy compliance is a bonus to the customers. Lower Energy Cost with the upfront cost of the upgrade eaten by the seller.
For the Sellers they would like that a bit differently.
Besides a lobby has a hand in any policy that may affect them for good or for bad, so they can get at least some say in what goes on.
After Spectrum bought out Time Warner in my area internet speeds tripled.
However this was a deal that started during the Obama era. With promises of faster speed to allow the buyout.
Hard to tell, ISP are for the most part unregulated, so how do we know if we are being throttled, or just their site is slower then others?
Being that ISP would want to keep this quite, they probably will make sure not to throttle internet speed tests, heck they may put them on the fast lane.
See we sold you 100mbs connection and run these speed tests and you are getting 105mbs.
The reason for Net Neutrality, is because ISP today are rarely just an ISP, but a media conglomerate. So we are using their infrastructure to access competitors, and new technology and sites which may require more bandwidth or different types of connections that the ISP may just not want to do. Because it is expensive.
Public work projects are expensive.
While there is a lot of waste that probably can be cleaned up, but often the cost of finding the waste is more expensive then the amount of waste itself.
However if you figure a Pot hole that needs to be filled
needs the following.
3 People:
2 People to direct traffic on both sides.
A person to fill the hole.
So if this process takes 1 hour. This would cost tax payers about $100 just for labor. Then there is management to determine where the potholes are and what priority they need to be fixed, Cost of material, upkeep of equipment...
Sure you could probably get some pavement patch yourself, for $15.00 then fill it yourself for much cheaper. But then you risk getting hit by a car, using patch material that could hurt the road further or cars that drive over it, so you are legally responsible for their damage. Or your skill at such a job will just not meet standards, and make the problem worse.
Why can't people deal with multiple issues?
I am not a doctor for that child, I am only a citizen who can vote during a particular time frame and lack the charisma to push for change, I am a technical person, who is good with technology. In terms of priorities in life, I should focus in life on what I can manage and control.
If this person can get a clear signal and internet, then it will let him know about the child who is dying (and perhaps he is a doctor who can help), realize that the president is lying, thus push further for change.
We can help in our own ways. Sometimes we are the ones who support the visible forces that cause change.
Still the local channels will often offer timely news and weather, while Netflix will not.
At least in my area, if there is a major weather event it will show its progress even with commercials playing.
In terms of getting immediate updates on local news events and weather. Local TV channels are better then the Internet (Where there is a lag to publish), Radio (Which can only cover one story at once), Print media (a full day delay)
Television is more then just entertainment. And News is more then just global and national politics.
It gets cold in New York. Heating with electricity is still expensive, and inefficient. We get more heat per dollar with actually burning stuff, and heating water and pumping that water around the building.
I use wood pellets during the winter myself, with oil heat as a backup.
Then there is electricity of AC in the summer, powering electrics and appliances.
Luxury homes tends to have everything ready for your convince. You turn on the Hot Tap, Hot water comes out almost immediately. Rooms are at a comfortable temperature all the time. So you don't walk into an uncomfortable room and wait for it get to the right temperature.
I expect this is mostly political, vs actually trying to save the environment. I am no way a Trump supporter, but this seems to be a political stunt just to hurt the president.
All fine and good. But back in the Z-80 days was it because you hated Microsoft, or that you like the Z-80 Better? Back in the early times, Going with an IBM PC with MS DOS was just as much as a risk as going with any other system. They were a lot of systems faster and cheaper then the IBM PC.
But that wasn't from Microsoft messing it up. Just the fact that IBM Made an expensive computer. Because it was build to survive a nuclear Holocaust.
Perhaps, or perhaps most of our "Leaders" are just really stupid.
...you mean, a company lied about their products? Inconceivable! FTFY
Until we have some Truth in Advertising laws with teeth, it is still buyer beware.
The key difference is that a reputable company only exaggerates vs lies.
With all that said. Showing off your phone with an ultra-high resolution display on TV and Print will not normally show well or express the quality of the product, so they will normally green screen a doctored image to make the display seem sharp and bright on print, your TV or computer.
But they are job creators.
JOB CREATORS.
Governments will bend backwards so a big company goes into their town and make Jobs.
The real winner is the town next to it. Where they have lower costs, and all the employees move there to live, and pay taxes to them.
Microsoft Wanted to Subscription Office even as early as 1999. If I were ambitious I could probably find a Slashdot article on it.
Actually it was more due to the PC Clone makers who reverse engineered the IBM Bios. Thus could license MS Dos to work on their systems.
IBM didn't want the OS license because the BIOS was suppose to be the key that locked them in.
Microsoft would probably would be happy being the IBM OS.
However being the clone makers were more about empowering alternatives. Once deemed legal, Microsoft was happy to sell them their software.
I have been using Star/Open/Libre office decades. The question about compatibility problems is always what are you expecting to do.
If you create a file in LibreOffice I don't see much compatibility. However if going back it may cause some issue, if they are using a brand new feature.
This is a reputation only to the Apple and Linux user base. Who have invested interest in seeing Microsoft getting its comeuppance.
The general population for the most part has seen MS rather fondly as the ones who gave them their internet, play their games, and power their businesses. Being that Microsoft was able to keep such a wide range of hardware compatibility and the last 15 years or so of Windows has been able to run so well is actually a testament to its quality.
Linux and Apple systems do crash and have problems, which often relate to crappy drivers and poor supported hardware.
Now all that being said. Apple really helped push people to become Apple Zealots last decade, which helped make microsoft seem less of your friend.
But what is Amazon doing with its R&D team?
If you flag it as good enough and the product is done. Then your R&D team will either be fired or moved onto a different product all together. Risking having your product become outdated, and not having the resources to ramp up and catch up.
Just like phones last decade. Flip Phones, reached what a Flip Phone can do. Smart Phones were dominated by black berry, and each update to blackberry wasn't that big of a deal.
Apple iPhone concept put shock into these companies. Causing them 2 years to rework and revamp their product line, because there was minimal R&D because a phone was a phone, and all was done was change the style.
To paraphrase a TV commercial for an energy bar and Doctor Who.
There is a difference between Nice and Kind.
Nice is the person with a big smile who makes you feel good.
Kind is working to help someone with their long term goals.
So for example say currently your job is to approve or reject a license, say to build home extensions. You have a large collection of applications to deal with. You could be a perfectly pleasant person, but will rubberstamp reject on the bulk of them. Leaving the requester having no idea on what the next steps are.
With this process automated, in the "Kindness Economy" A person would deal with the rejected list, and help the requester out to make sure the rejected reasons are dealt with and addressed so they will be able to put out an acceptable application. This job, may require the person to be tough and tell them the hard news, however that may be needed for the customer to go further.
I was not implying that we force this "Kindness Economy" but more of a prediction of that is where the natural progression probably will be in. And that we should prep for this. Just as my generation had kids learn how to use computers, write simple programs, because back in Gen X, The Computer Revolution (or "Data Economy" ) That we live in now, was only a prediction of things to come, but those pre-boomers and early boomers decided it was a good idea to adapt to this change. As their grandparents prepped them for the industrial revolution.
I don't think he'll easily find another job
Being that his job was to play video games and tell people what he thinks about it, then tried to cheat at that. He seems the looser of loosers.
I bet he was just trying to get a job for the Trump Administration.