Our society rewards clicks no matter what information is behind it. Go fucking figure people starting perpetuating hype and bullshit when that kind of capitalistic model is presented.
This is the same reason you find mainstream news outlets perpetuating fake news. This is the same reason banking institutions purposely break laws and perpetuate unethical activity for monetary gain. The crime of manipulation is worth it.
STOP fucking rewarding the behavior that perpetuates this shit. Otherwise the proverbial global database of information will become worthless, tainted with lies and doubt.
> I laugh at "black belts" in the martial arts who still need Mommy's help making cereal in the morning
Everyone knows there's a difference between a child's black belt and an adult's. Much like with this computer camp, it's not expected to get the same results as you'd want for an adult.
Awarding a black belt to a child changes the prestige and respect that used to be acknowledged with someone holding a black belt in the martial arts. You want to keep a child interested and motivated in the martial arts? Fine. Tell them that a black belt will be awarded when they can demonstrate the maturity, discipline, power, and control that such a prestigious award demands, demonstrated by an adult body and mind. Let that be a real goal to achieve. A black belt is something to be feared and respected. A black belt held by a five-year old is a joke.
If you were to put a parallel with coding, Ivankas daughter will be a "certified" coder armed with a resume by the time she's seven. Is there a point to that? No not really, other than continuing to raise yet another generation of special snowflakes who get a gold star for breathing; you know, 'cause that shit worked out so well for the current entitled generation of narcissists.
*sigh* It's like I'm talking to a wall. Ok let's put this in elementary school terms:
Your arguments all assume that the economy is a zero-sum game, but it's just not. In other words, the global economy isn't analogous to a pie that each person on this planet gets a slice of. A better analogy would be a pie that is always getting bigger and bigger, so each proverbial slice also grows bigger, no matter what percentage it makes up. However if you suddenly put a cap on just how rich the richest people can be, then this pie stops growing while the population continues to grow. This inevitably means that everybody gets poorer, not just the rich.
I hope that makes sense to you, because if it doesn't then honestly no amount of explaining will.
Yes, it does make sense. Good sense. One might even say it's Common Sense.
Unfortunately, it's rather worthless, since there's not a lot that makes sense anymore, including analogies that are based on the past.. When a person's survival is based on their ability to work and provide value, and our technology roadmap is looking to destroy the concept of human employment for the overwhelming majority, all bets are off. We don't have a pretty pie chart to accurately project this iteration of "growth". All we do have is the known constant of Greed, and no viable answer for what happens when the human employment is eradicated. Do you think those that are working to destroy the concept of human employment through automation and AI truly give a shit about anything beyond their own gains from such actions? Show me how a robotic manufacturer is planting the proverbial tree behind every mechanized solution to ensure a new job grows from that disruptive action. Show me how governments are actually concerned about this and working to ensure programs like UBI are funded reasonably, while working to find a point behind educating a human in the future. Hell, higher education struggles to justify the expense today, in an environment that still values and employs educated humans.
In the end, we still have not Solved for Greed, and the masses should prepare to join the Welfare state. Greed will ensure the rich are not obligated to pay you a penny more than what they feel the unemployable masses are worth, but you'll somehow feel better because all humans will hold the same quality of life. Starvation may become extinct, so perhaps there's some benefit as the poverty line rises slightly for all. Of course, the problem with less death is an ever-growing population and resource management. Again, the chasm between the uber-rich and the other 99% of the planet is widening, which tends to prove that our slice of the pie will likely not be much, no matter how big the proverbial pie gets.
...Bad things can happen no matter what, people aren't going to live in fear of what might happen to the degree that they don't share anything and instead try and be an anonymous, unidentifiable part of society.
I agree that the level of privacy violation is out of control nowadays but the net effect on the average person is zero so obviously they don't care.
This bullshit is being forced by corporations because they know their user base doesn't care. They're "indifferent". Well fuck it, why would corporations stop? Ever? Next up, RFID implants. Medical companies will want to track everything in the human body. Of course they'll say it's "for science", but the reality will be personalized health care rates that would make Wall Street HFT look slow. Real-time revenue increases? Sure, why not. After all, consumers are "indifferent" about their health.
Next up, Personal drones assigned to you from insurance companies, always monitoring you for risky activities that they could charge you more for. This invasive mentality will never stop, because humans are "indifferent" about being treated like a product. This isn't living in fear about the unknown. This is not giving a shit and allowing it to happen. It's pathetic.
I said before I really don't know who to blame. I stand corrected. It's rather obvious.
""We're excited to learn this incredibly important new language together. Coding truly is the language of the future."
Training that will last a proverbial 15 minutes should stick like water on a duck in the mind of a 5-year old. I understand trying to excite people at a young age, but this is also the reason I laugh at "black belts" in the martial arts who still need Mommy's help making cereal in the morning. Maturity both mentally and physically is key when it comes to certain education and training.
And since Ivanka is so excited to learn this language, they'll be a test later to see if your enthusiasm was genuine, or if this was nothing more than a PR stunt at taxpayers expense.
They fight the policies because the policies are forced on them by IT people that have no clue what engineers need. Every request to deviate from "the policy" is met with people like you proclaiming they're "fighting" the corporate IT policies. They just want to get their jobs done, which is what IT traditionally was there for, to help people get work done.
IT professionals just want to get their job done as well, which part of that duty is to ensure that systems and networks remain secure while helping people get their work done. Security policies are forced by the statistics and risks that justify their existence and enforcement.
People use cars to do the job of transportation. They don't wear seat belts because they're just going around the corner. They only had a little to drink. They respond to one more text message. They speed through a red light because they're in a hurry. These insecure actions ignore risk, and fight policies that exist for valid reasons. Unfortunately, we know what the end result is when security is ignored. The life of a person is at risk in this scenario. The life of a company is at risk when you look at the parallels.
"You're just being overprotective. It'll never happen to me." - famous last words.
They don't need to be security experts to know that they shouldn't run unencrypted drives on portable systems, the importance of good passwords, not running executables sent via email, etc. What do you think is going on with their dev environments that's so critical you need to have a security team to manage it?
What is going on in dev environments is often an abundance of sensitive data and code that is of high value to a corporation, and does not need to be inadvertently leaked to the competition via a hack or attack on systems. Do they need to be security experts? No. Do they need to be armed with common sense to ensure they follow security policy properly? Yes. The problem is they often fight common sense and best practice when it comes to security policy.
What you propose leads to a nightmare of locked down IT approved setups that are practically useless for getting development work done, and then you have a separate set of systems and network for doing the real work that is not IT encumbered. It doesn't achieve anything. IT generally refuses to acknowledge the needs of engineering and does nothing put but roadblocks in their way. That's not the role of that organization. You'll end up with very secure systems that will be sold for cheap at auction after the company is bankrupt and out of business.
What I propose is a system of standards that is adhered to based on best practice and common sense to avoid systems being hacked, and all of the intellectual property is stolen, which is also a path towards bankruptcy. Secure systems and processes achieve a goal by insulating a business from that threat. At the end of the day, it's all about risk management and mitigation efforts, which 99% of corporate users believe it will never happen to them, helping feed an insecure mentality.
Most InfoSec professionals can show the error of human ways based on historical events. What they cannot do is change those ways, so history will sadly repeat itself.
Oh so your ultimate answer is taxation on the AI/robotic overlords in order to feed the masses?
Again, your ignorance blinds you.
Dude, tone down the rhetoric. It really doesn't facilitate rational discussion. Unless your goal isn't to have a rational discussion but just to make yourself feel good by spewing doom. In that case, I guess you're succeeding, but I have no motivation to participate further.
I don't like wading around in the pool of reality any more than you do, but I don't like believing in a pipe dream either. Prove to me that the future will be any better than what the reality of today is, and I'll change my tone. Otherwise, I speak the truth, and often the truth hurts.
You assume that taxation has been the ultimate answer today, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens, driven by billionaire-funded lobbyists who manipulate governments into funding this kind of Greed. I fail to see how this shit situation will ever change in the future. The end result will be UBI being funded at the lowest legal level, which will essentially mean Welfare 2.0 for the planet.
The problem with money sitting offshore is caused entirely by the foolish decision to tax corporate income. Drop the corporate taxes -- or even reduce the rate significantly -- and that money will come flooding back, because it's not actually doing its owners any good offshore. Instead tax the shareholders on their gains. They can't so easily hide offshore because they actually want to live here.
The real problem (as you define it) is succeeding with dropping corporate taxes. The reason these loopholes exist is due to Greed that has gone unchecked. As I've stated before, we need to Solve for Greed in order to fix the underlying problems associated with it. Until man learns to be content and actually desire to help their fellow man, the world will continue down the path Greed has created. And to reinforce the reality of today, the chasm between the wealthy elite and the rest of the human race is growing, not shrinking. Soon, any care or concern about those on the other side of that great divide will evaporate into nothing. What you label as "foolishness" is backed by armies of lobbyists, representing the wealthy elite who practically demand tax loopholes in order to secure their riches. And they get what they demand today. Show me how that will change, and perhaps the truth of the future will not be as painful as it is today.
Your ignorance blinds you. The fact is damn near every fucking example you've brought forth here is at risk within the next 15 - 20 years.
Think about that before you rant again, because much like the rest of society, you have no solution for it.
Solution for what? What is the problem?
The coming wave of automation is going to create an unparalleled era of abundance. The reason many jobs will disappear is because there will be no need for humans to labor. This isn't a problem, this is awesome!
We do have to figure out a way to transition from our current scarcity-based economic structure, with incentives that are focused on making sure as many people as possible work, to a post-scarcity economy that has no need of such stark and powerful labor incentives (e.g. work or starve). My guess is that this will take the form of a universal basic income, paid for by taxing the owners of the capital infrastructure (i.e. the robots) that do all of the production. But because automation will dramatically lower the cost of goods and services, this should be easy to do. The only real obstacles are getting everyone to understand the need to make the transition, and handling the timing so that the need to work is phased out in step with the reduced demand for work.
Oh so your ultimate answer is taxation on the AI/robotic overlords in order to feed the masses?
Again, your ignorance blinds you. You assume that taxation has been the ultimate answer today, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens, driven by billionaire-funded lobbyists who manipulate governments into funding this kind of Greed. I fail to see how this shit situation will ever change in the future. The end result will be UBI being funded at the lowest legal level, which will essentially mean Welfare 2.0 for the planet.
>The problem to solve is one of Greed, as in what the hell are the 99% supposed to survive and thrive on once the AI/automation overlords declare employing a human a dead concept
Agreed. I've been arguing that for years but you get people from one side arguing about buggy whips and history repeating itself and people from the other side arguing 'post-scarcity paradise'.
Since there IS no practical solution to the issue - power's going to accumulate in the hands of whoever owns the robots - it gets tiring to ask people to think one up when you get constantly dismissed.
I expect we'll see an exponential trend in wealth disparity growth, and then a revolution that (hopefully) happens before the rich have the capacity to rule with the force of robotic armies.
It'd be NICE if everyone shared in the productivity increase, perhaps if we started by legislating reduced work weeks, but history shows there are enough greedy amoral assholes out there that this is unlikely, and the masses will stay complacent so long as their bellies are full and they have some entertainment to keep them occupied.
It would be NICE if those handful who control the wealth of the fucking planet would help those who are starving and simply struggling to survive, but the reality is that shit isn't going to happen, and the exponential trend you worry about is going to be the end result.
This is why I keep stating the obvious; in order to survive we need to Solve for Greed.
What you call a nightmare, I call an effective R&D organization. IT is a barrier to engineers being successful. Forced compliance with no input from engineering means that engineers will spend a lot of their time trying to find work-arounds for things they need to do but have had roadblocks put in place. Any decent developer knows the value of strong passwords and encryption. If you have numb-nuts that don't understand that, they shouldn't be in your codebase. They're incompetent. Yes, developers tend to postpone updates. I'm an offender there. Why? Context switching costs time which costs money. Once the system resets there's a cost associated with getting back to the previous point, looking at whatever code, docs, tests, remote systems, etc. It's a balancing act. The wrong solution is forcing updates and rebooting systems in the middle of presentations or some tricky debugging. Again, there's a cost there. IT has no place in engineering unless they're specifically requested.
"Specifically requested" implies that engineers know how to manage their own environments, and are security experts. Reality shows they are clearly not, and the importance of security overriding business demand whenever necessary.
Much like the ambulance racing through the city streets ignoring traffic lights, I don't give a shit what the fuck what users assume is the priority du jour. An InfoSec professional is hired and on staff to ensure systems are protected at all times, not when it's merely convenient.
From a security perspective, I was including developers in that description of average users.
That may be indicative of problems in your hiring methodology, management, and/or employee conduct standards.
Given the fact that society has not changed one bit regardless of the increasing risk, I'd say it's more a problem of you not understanding human behavior.
The top 10 worst passwords have not changed in decades, standing in the face of increasing risk of hacking and identity theft because of shitty passwords. That clearly says one thing; humans don't give a shit about security.
It doesn't even matter anymore as to why, as many have given up on understanding that. Doesn't matter if it's the It'll-never-happen-to-me syndrome, or I-don't-give-a-shit syndrome. The fact of the matter is human behavior has not changed, no matter what the risk is.
Because of this, it doesn't matter how hiring practices are modified. And these days, management cannot afford to lose a valuable asset, even temporarily, so little value is placed on security enforcement.
Oh yeah it's positively terrible out there for humans! This morning I had to dodge around all the robots doing road construction on my street, the robot neighbor walking his robot dogs, the robot making my espresso when I got to work, all the robots in the hallways, the lab full of robots working on validatiing other robots, and just now I got an email from my robot boss who sent me a list of all the robots that he wants me to be sure have access to our fileserver so they can share information with other robots about the robot projects they're all working on for the robot CEO. Just remembered I'll need to go down to the cafeteria later to ask the robot cashiers to give me a refund for the vending machine that ripped me off. I am looking forward to when I'm off work, there are robot shows I want to sit down and watch with my robot wife and robot kids, and it's always relaxing to make the robot cat chase the laser pointer.
Your ignorance blinds you. The fact is damn near every fucking example you've brought forth here is at risk within the next 15 - 20 years.
Think about that before you rant again, because much like the rest of society, you have no solution for it.
Few places investigate robots until it's easier than hiring meat, which usually means they're thinking of an 8 hour shift.
Once they get a robot and realize that (excepting maintenance) it can go 24/7 and doesn't need vacation, sick time, it turns out robots are around 6.5x more productive than a human (at a task a robot can currently perform). The fact that they don't need benefits either makes them even more cost effective.
And that's just uptime. Robots - for a lot of tasks, at least - have the capacity to be much, much faster than humans, with a much lower error rate if the task is sufficiently standardized.
No one is arguing the benefit of replacing humans with robots.
The problem to solve is one of Greed, as in what the hell are the 99% supposed to survive and thrive on once the AI/automation overlords declare employing a human a dead concept.
I keep hearing proposals of taxation to offset this, along with concepts like UBI. I call bullshit on all of this, because corporations are some of the best examples of tax-dodging, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens. That shit situation will likely never change, nor will pure unadulterated Greed that drives this notion to replace every human job with AI/automation in order to "save costs".
Vision of the future? Sorry, vision doesn't exceed the next fiscal quarter. That is all that those who impact this situation care about.
What you fail to understand here is the Greed I wish to solve for is not Greed stemming from the average man. It is the particular flavor of Greed that is creating this clusterfuck. The humans who literally have billions and are still not satisfied and demand more.
What part about the words "hedonic treadmill" don't you understand? Go look up what that term means and then think about what you just said here. It perfectly explains what you're complaining about, and the hedonic treadmill applies to all people, from hobos to billionaires.
That chasm between the handful of humans who own half the wealth on the planet isn't shrinking. The proverbial treadmill may exist at all levels, but it is out of fucking control at the highest levels. We need to stop fucking "observing" the phenomenon of never being content at that level, and solve for it, so we can stop dividing the human race between the 1% who control and manipulate the 99%.
THAT is the Greed that we need to solve for, and for the benefit of all mankind.
No, it won't benefit anybody. All it will do is effectively cap economic growth and make people poorer, which is exactly what you end up with when you try to "fix" these things. Yes, it is true that the rich get richer, however the poor are also getting richer. Does the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest increase over time? Yes. However that does not in any way mean that the poor are getting poorer, and in fact the poor are not getting poorer, and in fact their quality of life is always improving, which is something that can actually be proven with hard numbers and statistics:
By the way, I'm willing to bet that you'd score worse than the chimpanzees in Hans Rosling's test.
In the past, shifts in technology resulted in humans being put out of a job. The answer was always "go find another one", or "go get educated".
The discussion at hand here has to do with the next, and likely last evolution of technology, which is automation and AI replacing the concept of human employment. CEOs today would rather hire robots than pay humans $15/hour minimum wage. That greedy mentality is merely the tip of the iceberg. AI engines that can comb through thousands of legal cases in minutes will outperform any human lawyer with regards to research. Robotics working with precision that will eliminate human error in the surgical room. Autonomous cars removing the need for human drivers and any related employment. Within the next half-century, automation and AI will likely be able do any job a human is doing today, and probably better. Unless we solve for Greed, the chasm between those who control automation and AI and the rest of the human race will continue to grow, perhaps well beyond care or concern for the unemployed masses. Go get an education? What the hell for? There's nothing for humans to actually go do anymore. The wealthiest billionaires on the planet have no desire today to part ways with the majority of their riches in order to better the planet, so I fail to see how that would ever change in the future.
To Hans Roslings credit, has the quality of life across the planet improved? Yes. My point is it could be a hell of a lot better for a lot more people if the wealthy elite actually embraced the concept of being content, and shared wealth to help millions. Of course, the other impact of reducing natural disaster deaths and people living longer is managing finite resources against an ever-growing population, which will eventually fight against the goal of ever-improving metrics. Forget the Greed problem for a minute. Think the planet can sustain a population of 12 billion? 20 billion? How hard i
If they want to pick their own tools, let them. I don't understand this fear of giving developers admin access to their machines. What do you think is going to happen if they get this supremely powerful level of access? If some are happy with VMs, let them use VMs. If some want to install, configure, and update their tools manually, let them. If it becomes a problem for a specific developer, steer them towards a VM instead. If you can't trust developers to maintain their system then you probably shouldn't be trusting them to write your company's code either.
From a security point of view, you've painted a fucking nightmare. Look at how the average user chooses passwords when given the complete freedom to use "123456". Update tools manually? That would be never, because maintaining security patches takes time and effort they don't want to be bothered with that. Give them local admin rights and they'll install any development tool they feel like using, including ones that may need to be licensed properly in order to be legal in a business or corporate environment. They would bitch about disk encryption slowing their system down, so of course let's disable/uninstall that, dismissing any concern of IP or weeks of work gone due to laptop theft or loss, which of course leads into the next issue of local storage, as they would bitch about network speeds being too slow when doing work across any wire, so all work will be stored locally with no backups, ready to fall victim to hardware failure.
There's a reason you hire competent IT professionals and developers, because the latter does not replace the former; has nothing to do with trust.
It seems like our uber powerful dev machines are turning into expensive terminals and the ESX cloud is our new time sharing mainframe. Everything old is new again.
Users suck at security. Always have. Nothing is new, other than the threat of compromise or data loss increasing year after year, and tools being rather necessary to counteract that threat. Risk mitigation is the name of the game today.
Which will never work, UBI will never work. Why because people will never be satisfied with what they have. They will always want more.
Which is why UBI will work. People won't just sit back and be lazy - they will want more, and will work for it. The whole "UBI will just create lazy people" meme is a lie, because people always want more.
Oh really?
Ever notice how many people living in the Welfare state are highly motivated to change their status?
Just stop already.
Give me what I really want.
Intel, ati graphics, g2 to g5 lte, 5 days battery life, 2-3 usb ports, and a dock so I can plug it in and use it as a desktop with full featured Os.
Curious, you plan on prioritizing security when converting your desktop into one of the most hacked platforms on the planet, or will a good security model continue to be a mere annoyance for the masses?
There is only one equation the human race needs to figure out in order to survive.
Solve for Greed.
That's never going to happen. Greed is a fundamental feature of who you are. Even if you were given everything you ever wanted, you'll eventually want more, owing to the hedonic treadmill. Saying otherwise would be like saying you can stop a person from ever having desires (even repressed ones) to cheat on their spouse.
Every time somebody tries to solve greed, what results is a crappy system of government that makes the average person much worse off. UBI, if it were to ever become a thing, would just be yet another iteration of that.
What you fail to understand here is the Greed I wish to solve for is not Greed stemming from the average man. It is the particular flavor of Greed that is creating this clusterfuck. The humans who literally have billions and are still not satisfied and demand more. THAT is the Greed that we need to solve for, and for the benefit of all mankind.
As far as the average man, all it will take is a single generation of the global Welfare state in place for humans to be humbled enough to be content. To live an survive. Sure, there may be old-timers ranting about the "good old days" of capitalism and the American Dream, but that will eventually die out as humans accept their standard issue fate.
Don't be a moron. This has nothing to do with minimum wage possibly getting set at a reasonable number. They are going to do it either way and you know it, so stop pushing your absurd political agenda.
My comments have fuck-all to do with politics, for one simple reason.
Human society NEEDS to be ready for the inevitable reality where NOBODY works, and the only people who "Make money", are those who OWN robots, or have a share in companies, and milk their investments.
Money ceases to be an essential functional commodity in such a circumstance, as people will invent alternative methods of exchange to obtain necessary services.
Either money has to be distributed for no labor expended by a governing body (basic income strategy), or true post-scarcity future economic models need to be created. There are no alternatives where really rich people get everything and everyone else just dies. (Sorry plutocrats, but that is how you destroy the human race, not live immortal, pampered lives.)
There is only one equation the human race needs to figure out in order to survive.
Solve for Greed.
Plutocrats turning the planet into a global Welfare state as Greed funds UBI at the lowest level possible will likely result in another concept coming to fruition.
Regardless if people fight the idea or not, automation and AI decimating the concept and capability of human employment is no longer science fiction. And when US states started crying out for $15 minimum wage rates, the initial response back from corporations was to look towards automation, because that option was now worth the investment.
Coming to the conclusion that automation and AI would target countries with higher wage costs seems to be rather obvious. The real question is what will be done to control unending Greed from turning the planet into a Welfare state.
We keep talking about UBI, which is another concept that will become inevitable as automation and AI decimate human employment. The problem lies with funding UBI, which will likely be done through taxation. Unfortunately, corporations are some of the worst entities when it comes to actually paying taxes by employing armies of lobbyists to minimize or hide those obligations, with the end result being trillions sitting in offshore tax havens today. Since this will never change, unending Greed will all but guarantee that UBI will become nothing more than Welfare 2.0 for the masses.
You can forget the American Dream. You can forget the Human Dream. The reality of automation and AI is a global Welfare state, all because of Greed.
Slashdot Mirror
Our society rewards clicks no matter what information is behind it. Go fucking figure people starting perpetuating hype and bullshit when that kind of capitalistic model is presented.
This is the same reason you find mainstream news outlets perpetuating fake news. This is the same reason banking institutions purposely break laws and perpetuate unethical activity for monetary gain. The crime of manipulation is worth it.
STOP fucking rewarding the behavior that perpetuates this shit. Otherwise the proverbial global database of information will become worthless, tainted with lies and doubt.
> I laugh at "black belts" in the martial arts who still need Mommy's help making cereal in the morning
Everyone knows there's a difference between a child's black belt and an adult's. Much like with this computer camp, it's not expected to get the same results as you'd want for an adult.
Awarding a black belt to a child changes the prestige and respect that used to be acknowledged with someone holding a black belt in the martial arts. You want to keep a child interested and motivated in the martial arts? Fine. Tell them that a black belt will be awarded when they can demonstrate the maturity, discipline, power, and control that such a prestigious award demands, demonstrated by an adult body and mind. Let that be a real goal to achieve. A black belt is something to be feared and respected. A black belt held by a five-year old is a joke.
If you were to put a parallel with coding, Ivankas daughter will be a "certified" coder armed with a resume by the time she's seven. Is there a point to that? No not really, other than continuing to raise yet another generation of special snowflakes who get a gold star for breathing; you know, 'cause that shit worked out so well for the current entitled generation of narcissists.
*sigh* It's like I'm talking to a wall. Ok let's put this in elementary school terms:
Your arguments all assume that the economy is a zero-sum game, but it's just not. In other words, the global economy isn't analogous to a pie that each person on this planet gets a slice of. A better analogy would be a pie that is always getting bigger and bigger, so each proverbial slice also grows bigger, no matter what percentage it makes up. However if you suddenly put a cap on just how rich the richest people can be, then this pie stops growing while the population continues to grow. This inevitably means that everybody gets poorer, not just the rich.
I hope that makes sense to you, because if it doesn't then honestly no amount of explaining will.
Yes, it does make sense. Good sense. One might even say it's Common Sense.
Unfortunately, it's rather worthless, since there's not a lot that makes sense anymore, including analogies that are based on the past.. When a person's survival is based on their ability to work and provide value, and our technology roadmap is looking to destroy the concept of human employment for the overwhelming majority, all bets are off. We don't have a pretty pie chart to accurately project this iteration of "growth". All we do have is the known constant of Greed, and no viable answer for what happens when the human employment is eradicated. Do you think those that are working to destroy the concept of human employment through automation and AI truly give a shit about anything beyond their own gains from such actions? Show me how a robotic manufacturer is planting the proverbial tree behind every mechanized solution to ensure a new job grows from that disruptive action. Show me how governments are actually concerned about this and working to ensure programs like UBI are funded reasonably, while working to find a point behind educating a human in the future. Hell, higher education struggles to justify the expense today, in an environment that still values and employs educated humans.
In the end, we still have not Solved for Greed, and the masses should prepare to join the Welfare state. Greed will ensure the rich are not obligated to pay you a penny more than what they feel the unemployable masses are worth, but you'll somehow feel better because all humans will hold the same quality of life. Starvation may become extinct, so perhaps there's some benefit as the poverty line rises slightly for all. Of course, the problem with less death is an ever-growing population and resource management. Again, the chasm between the uber-rich and the other 99% of the planet is widening, which tends to prove that our slice of the pie will likely not be much, no matter how big the proverbial pie gets.
...Bad things can happen no matter what, people aren't going to live in fear of what might happen to the degree that they don't share anything and instead try and be an anonymous, unidentifiable part of society.
I agree that the level of privacy violation is out of control nowadays but the net effect on the average person is zero so obviously they don't care.
This bullshit is being forced by corporations because they know their user base doesn't care. They're "indifferent". Well fuck it, why would corporations stop? Ever? Next up, RFID implants. Medical companies will want to track everything in the human body. Of course they'll say it's "for science", but the reality will be personalized health care rates that would make Wall Street HFT look slow. Real-time revenue increases? Sure, why not. After all, consumers are "indifferent" about their health.
Next up, Personal drones assigned to you from insurance companies, always monitoring you for risky activities that they could charge you more for. This invasive mentality will never stop, because humans are "indifferent" about being treated like a product. This isn't living in fear about the unknown. This is not giving a shit and allowing it to happen. It's pathetic.
I said before I really don't know who to blame. I stand corrected. It's rather obvious.
""We're excited to learn this incredibly important new language together. Coding truly is the language of the future."
Training that will last a proverbial 15 minutes should stick like water on a duck in the mind of a 5-year old. I understand trying to excite people at a young age, but this is also the reason I laugh at "black belts" in the martial arts who still need Mommy's help making cereal in the morning. Maturity both mentally and physically is key when it comes to certain education and training.
And since Ivanka is so excited to learn this language, they'll be a test later to see if your enthusiasm was genuine, or if this was nothing more than a PR stunt at taxpayers expense.
Dear Verizon,
Fuck You.
Oh, wait, how rude of me.
Fuck You Very Much.
I don't know who to blame more. Verizon, or their customer base who doesn't give a shit.
Consumers, continue to enjoy your privacy ass-raping. You should enjoy it, because you support it.
What the hell is that?
Millennial hipster-speak for identifying the decade that follows the 90s.
They fight the policies because the policies are forced on them by IT people that have no clue what engineers need. Every request to deviate from "the policy" is met with people like you proclaiming they're "fighting" the corporate IT policies. They just want to get their jobs done, which is what IT traditionally was there for, to help people get work done.
IT professionals just want to get their job done as well, which part of that duty is to ensure that systems and networks remain secure while helping people get their work done. Security policies are forced by the statistics and risks that justify their existence and enforcement.
People use cars to do the job of transportation. They don't wear seat belts because they're just going around the corner. They only had a little to drink. They respond to one more text message. They speed through a red light because they're in a hurry. These insecure actions ignore risk, and fight policies that exist for valid reasons. Unfortunately, we know what the end result is when security is ignored. The life of a person is at risk in this scenario. The life of a company is at risk when you look at the parallels.
"You're just being overprotective. It'll never happen to me." - famous last words.
They don't need to be security experts to know that they shouldn't run unencrypted drives on portable systems, the importance of good passwords, not running executables sent via email, etc. What do you think is going on with their dev environments that's so critical you need to have a security team to manage it?
What is going on in dev environments is often an abundance of sensitive data and code that is of high value to a corporation, and does not need to be inadvertently leaked to the competition via a hack or attack on systems. Do they need to be security experts? No. Do they need to be armed with common sense to ensure they follow security policy properly? Yes. The problem is they often fight common sense and best practice when it comes to security policy.
What you propose leads to a nightmare of locked down IT approved setups that are practically useless for getting development work done, and then you have a separate set of systems and network for doing the real work that is not IT encumbered. It doesn't achieve anything. IT generally refuses to acknowledge the needs of engineering and does nothing put but roadblocks in their way. That's not the role of that organization. You'll end up with very secure systems that will be sold for cheap at auction after the company is bankrupt and out of business.
What I propose is a system of standards that is adhered to based on best practice and common sense to avoid systems being hacked, and all of the intellectual property is stolen, which is also a path towards bankruptcy. Secure systems and processes achieve a goal by insulating a business from that threat. At the end of the day, it's all about risk management and mitigation efforts, which 99% of corporate users believe it will never happen to them, helping feed an insecure mentality.
Most InfoSec professionals can show the error of human ways based on historical events. What they cannot do is change those ways, so history will sadly repeat itself.
Oh so your ultimate answer is taxation on the AI/robotic overlords in order to feed the masses?
Again, your ignorance blinds you.
Dude, tone down the rhetoric. It really doesn't facilitate rational discussion. Unless your goal isn't to have a rational discussion but just to make yourself feel good by spewing doom. In that case, I guess you're succeeding, but I have no motivation to participate further.
I don't like wading around in the pool of reality any more than you do, but I don't like believing in a pipe dream either. Prove to me that the future will be any better than what the reality of today is, and I'll change my tone. Otherwise, I speak the truth, and often the truth hurts.
You assume that taxation has been the ultimate answer today, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens, driven by billionaire-funded lobbyists who manipulate governments into funding this kind of Greed. I fail to see how this shit situation will ever change in the future. The end result will be UBI being funded at the lowest legal level, which will essentially mean Welfare 2.0 for the planet.
The problem with money sitting offshore is caused entirely by the foolish decision to tax corporate income. Drop the corporate taxes -- or even reduce the rate significantly -- and that money will come flooding back, because it's not actually doing its owners any good offshore. Instead tax the shareholders on their gains. They can't so easily hide offshore because they actually want to live here.
The real problem (as you define it) is succeeding with dropping corporate taxes. The reason these loopholes exist is due to Greed that has gone unchecked. As I've stated before, we need to Solve for Greed in order to fix the underlying problems associated with it. Until man learns to be content and actually desire to help their fellow man, the world will continue down the path Greed has created. And to reinforce the reality of today, the chasm between the wealthy elite and the rest of the human race is growing, not shrinking. Soon, any care or concern about those on the other side of that great divide will evaporate into nothing. What you label as "foolishness" is backed by armies of lobbyists, representing the wealthy elite who practically demand tax loopholes in order to secure their riches. And they get what they demand today. Show me how that will change, and perhaps the truth of the future will not be as painful as it is today.
Your ignorance blinds you. The fact is damn near every fucking example you've brought forth here is at risk within the next 15 - 20 years.
Think about that before you rant again, because much like the rest of society, you have no solution for it.
Solution for what? What is the problem?
The coming wave of automation is going to create an unparalleled era of abundance. The reason many jobs will disappear is because there will be no need for humans to labor. This isn't a problem, this is awesome!
We do have to figure out a way to transition from our current scarcity-based economic structure, with incentives that are focused on making sure as many people as possible work, to a post-scarcity economy that has no need of such stark and powerful labor incentives (e.g. work or starve). My guess is that this will take the form of a universal basic income, paid for by taxing the owners of the capital infrastructure (i.e. the robots) that do all of the production. But because automation will dramatically lower the cost of goods and services, this should be easy to do. The only real obstacles are getting everyone to understand the need to make the transition, and handling the timing so that the need to work is phased out in step with the reduced demand for work.
Oh so your ultimate answer is taxation on the AI/robotic overlords in order to feed the masses?
Again, your ignorance blinds you. You assume that taxation has been the ultimate answer today, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens, driven by billionaire-funded lobbyists who manipulate governments into funding this kind of Greed. I fail to see how this shit situation will ever change in the future. The end result will be UBI being funded at the lowest legal level, which will essentially mean Welfare 2.0 for the planet.
>The problem to solve is one of Greed, as in what the hell are the 99% supposed to survive and thrive on once the AI/automation overlords declare employing a human a dead concept
Agreed. I've been arguing that for years but you get people from one side arguing about buggy whips and history repeating itself and people from the other side arguing 'post-scarcity paradise'.
Since there IS no practical solution to the issue - power's going to accumulate in the hands of whoever owns the robots - it gets tiring to ask people to think one up when you get constantly dismissed.
I expect we'll see an exponential trend in wealth disparity growth, and then a revolution that (hopefully) happens before the rich have the capacity to rule with the force of robotic armies.
It'd be NICE if everyone shared in the productivity increase, perhaps if we started by legislating reduced work weeks, but history shows there are enough greedy amoral assholes out there that this is unlikely, and the masses will stay complacent so long as their bellies are full and they have some entertainment to keep them occupied.
It would be NICE if those handful who control the wealth of the fucking planet would help those who are starving and simply struggling to survive, but the reality is that shit isn't going to happen, and the exponential trend you worry about is going to be the end result.
This is why I keep stating the obvious; in order to survive we need to Solve for Greed.
What you call a nightmare, I call an effective R&D organization. IT is a barrier to engineers being successful. Forced compliance with no input from engineering means that engineers will spend a lot of their time trying to find work-arounds for things they need to do but have had roadblocks put in place. Any decent developer knows the value of strong passwords and encryption. If you have numb-nuts that don't understand that, they shouldn't be in your codebase. They're incompetent. Yes, developers tend to postpone updates. I'm an offender there. Why? Context switching costs time which costs money. Once the system resets there's a cost associated with getting back to the previous point, looking at whatever code, docs, tests, remote systems, etc. It's a balancing act. The wrong solution is forcing updates and rebooting systems in the middle of presentations or some tricky debugging. Again, there's a cost there. IT has no place in engineering unless they're specifically requested.
"Specifically requested" implies that engineers know how to manage their own environments, and are security experts. Reality shows they are clearly not, and the importance of security overriding business demand whenever necessary.
Much like the ambulance racing through the city streets ignoring traffic lights, I don't give a shit what the fuck what users assume is the priority du jour. An InfoSec professional is hired and on staff to ensure systems are protected at all times, not when it's merely convenient.
From a security perspective, I was including developers in that description of average users.
That may be indicative of problems in your hiring methodology, management, and/or employee conduct standards.
Given the fact that society has not changed one bit regardless of the increasing risk, I'd say it's more a problem of you not understanding human behavior.
The top 10 worst passwords have not changed in decades, standing in the face of increasing risk of hacking and identity theft because of shitty passwords. That clearly says one thing; humans don't give a shit about security.
It doesn't even matter anymore as to why, as many have given up on understanding that. Doesn't matter if it's the It'll-never-happen-to-me syndrome, or I-don't-give-a-shit syndrome. The fact of the matter is human behavior has not changed, no matter what the risk is.
Because of this, it doesn't matter how hiring practices are modified. And these days, management cannot afford to lose a valuable asset, even temporarily, so little value is placed on security enforcement.
Oh yeah it's positively terrible out there for humans! This morning I had to dodge around all the robots doing road construction on my street, the robot neighbor walking his robot dogs, the robot making my espresso when I got to work, all the robots in the hallways, the lab full of robots working on validatiing other robots, and just now I got an email from my robot boss who sent me a list of all the robots that he wants me to be sure have access to our fileserver so they can share information with other robots about the robot projects they're all working on for the robot CEO. Just remembered I'll need to go down to the cafeteria later to ask the robot cashiers to give me a refund for the vending machine that ripped me off. I am looking forward to when I'm off work, there are robot shows I want to sit down and watch with my robot wife and robot kids, and it's always relaxing to make the robot cat chase the laser pointer.
Your ignorance blinds you. The fact is damn near every fucking example you've brought forth here is at risk within the next 15 - 20 years.
Think about that before you rant again, because much like the rest of society, you have no solution for it.
Few places investigate robots until it's easier than hiring meat, which usually means they're thinking of an 8 hour shift.
Once they get a robot and realize that (excepting maintenance) it can go 24/7 and doesn't need vacation, sick time, it turns out robots are around 6.5x more productive than a human (at a task a robot can currently perform). The fact that they don't need benefits either makes them even more cost effective.
And that's just uptime. Robots - for a lot of tasks, at least - have the capacity to be much, much faster than humans, with a much lower error rate if the task is sufficiently standardized.
No one is arguing the benefit of replacing humans with robots.
The problem to solve is one of Greed, as in what the hell are the 99% supposed to survive and thrive on once the AI/automation overlords declare employing a human a dead concept.
I keep hearing proposals of taxation to offset this, along with concepts like UBI. I call bullshit on all of this, because corporations are some of the best examples of tax-dodging, as trillions sit in offshore tax havens. That shit situation will likely never change, nor will pure unadulterated Greed that drives this notion to replace every human job with AI/automation in order to "save costs".
Vision of the future? Sorry, vision doesn't exceed the next fiscal quarter. That is all that those who impact this situation care about.
Look at how the average user chooses passwords when given the complete freedom to use "123456".
Where do you work that the average user gets access to developer machines?
From a security perspective, I was including developers in that description of average users.
What you fail to understand here is the Greed I wish to solve for is not Greed stemming from the average man. It is the particular flavor of Greed that is creating this clusterfuck. The humans who literally have billions and are still not satisfied and demand more.
What part about the words "hedonic treadmill" don't you understand? Go look up what that term means and then think about what you just said here. It perfectly explains what you're complaining about, and the hedonic treadmill applies to all people, from hobos to billionaires.
That chasm between the handful of humans who own half the wealth on the planet isn't shrinking. The proverbial treadmill may exist at all levels, but it is out of fucking control at the highest levels. We need to stop fucking "observing" the phenomenon of never being content at that level, and solve for it, so we can stop dividing the human race between the 1% who control and manipulate the 99%.
THAT is the Greed that we need to solve for, and for the benefit of all mankind.
No, it won't benefit anybody. All it will do is effectively cap economic growth and make people poorer, which is exactly what you end up with when you try to "fix" these things. Yes, it is true that the rich get richer, however the poor are also getting richer. Does the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest increase over time? Yes. However that does not in any way mean that the poor are getting poorer, and in fact the poor are not getting poorer, and in fact their quality of life is always improving, which is something that can actually be proven with hard numbers and statistics:
https://www.ted.com/talks/hans...
By the way, I'm willing to bet that you'd score worse than the chimpanzees in Hans Rosling's test.
In the past, shifts in technology resulted in humans being put out of a job. The answer was always "go find another one", or "go get educated".
The discussion at hand here has to do with the next, and likely last evolution of technology, which is automation and AI replacing the concept of human employment. CEOs today would rather hire robots than pay humans $15/hour minimum wage. That greedy mentality is merely the tip of the iceberg. AI engines that can comb through thousands of legal cases in minutes will outperform any human lawyer with regards to research. Robotics working with precision that will eliminate human error in the surgical room. Autonomous cars removing the need for human drivers and any related employment. Within the next half-century, automation and AI will likely be able do any job a human is doing today, and probably better. Unless we solve for Greed, the chasm between those who control automation and AI and the rest of the human race will continue to grow, perhaps well beyond care or concern for the unemployed masses. Go get an education? What the hell for? There's nothing for humans to actually go do anymore. The wealthiest billionaires on the planet have no desire today to part ways with the majority of their riches in order to better the planet, so I fail to see how that would ever change in the future.
To Hans Roslings credit, has the quality of life across the planet improved? Yes. My point is it could be a hell of a lot better for a lot more people if the wealthy elite actually embraced the concept of being content, and shared wealth to help millions. Of course, the other impact of reducing natural disaster deaths and people living longer is managing finite resources against an ever-growing population, which will eventually fight against the goal of ever-improving metrics. Forget the Greed problem for a minute. Think the planet can sustain a population of 12 billion? 20 billion? How hard i
If they want to pick their own tools, let them. I don't understand this fear of giving developers admin access to their machines. What do you think is going to happen if they get this supremely powerful level of access? If some are happy with VMs, let them use VMs. If some want to install, configure, and update their tools manually, let them. If it becomes a problem for a specific developer, steer them towards a VM instead. If you can't trust developers to maintain their system then you probably shouldn't be trusting them to write your company's code either.
From a security point of view, you've painted a fucking nightmare. Look at how the average user chooses passwords when given the complete freedom to use "123456". Update tools manually? That would be never, because maintaining security patches takes time and effort they don't want to be bothered with that. Give them local admin rights and they'll install any development tool they feel like using, including ones that may need to be licensed properly in order to be legal in a business or corporate environment. They would bitch about disk encryption slowing their system down, so of course let's disable/uninstall that, dismissing any concern of IP or weeks of work gone due to laptop theft or loss, which of course leads into the next issue of local storage, as they would bitch about network speeds being too slow when doing work across any wire, so all work will be stored locally with no backups, ready to fall victim to hardware failure.
There's a reason you hire competent IT professionals and developers, because the latter does not replace the former; has nothing to do with trust.
It seems like our uber powerful dev machines are turning into expensive terminals and the ESX cloud is our new time sharing mainframe. Everything old is new again.
Users suck at security. Always have. Nothing is new, other than the threat of compromise or data loss increasing year after year, and tools being rather necessary to counteract that threat. Risk mitigation is the name of the game today.
Which will never work, UBI will never work. Why because people will never be satisfied with what they have. They will always want more.
Which is why UBI will work. People won't just sit back and be lazy - they will want more, and will work for it. The whole "UBI will just create lazy people" meme is a lie, because people always want more.
Oh really?
Ever notice how many people living in the Welfare state are highly motivated to change their status?
Yeah, me neither.
Just stop already. Give me what I really want. Intel, ati graphics, g2 to g5 lte, 5 days battery life, 2-3 usb ports, and a dock so I can plug it in and use it as a desktop with full featured Os.
Curious, you plan on prioritizing security when converting your desktop into one of the most hacked platforms on the planet, or will a good security model continue to be a mere annoyance for the masses?
There is only one equation the human race needs to figure out in order to survive.
Solve for Greed.
That's never going to happen. Greed is a fundamental feature of who you are. Even if you were given everything you ever wanted, you'll eventually want more, owing to the hedonic treadmill. Saying otherwise would be like saying you can stop a person from ever having desires (even repressed ones) to cheat on their spouse.
Every time somebody tries to solve greed, what results is a crappy system of government that makes the average person much worse off. UBI, if it were to ever become a thing, would just be yet another iteration of that.
What you fail to understand here is the Greed I wish to solve for is not Greed stemming from the average man. It is the particular flavor of Greed that is creating this clusterfuck. The humans who literally have billions and are still not satisfied and demand more. THAT is the Greed that we need to solve for, and for the benefit of all mankind.
As far as the average man, all it will take is a single generation of the global Welfare state in place for humans to be humbled enough to be content. To live an survive. Sure, there may be old-timers ranting about the "good old days" of capitalism and the American Dream, but that will eventually die out as humans accept their standard issue fate.
Don't be a moron. This has nothing to do with minimum wage possibly getting set at a reasonable number. They are going to do it either way and you know it, so stop pushing your absurd political agenda.
My comments have fuck-all to do with politics, for one simple reason.
Greed is colorblind.
Human society NEEDS to be ready for the inevitable reality where NOBODY works, and the only people who "Make money", are those who OWN robots, or have a share in companies, and milk their investments.
Money ceases to be an essential functional commodity in such a circumstance, as people will invent alternative methods of exchange to obtain necessary services.
Either money has to be distributed for no labor expended by a governing body (basic income strategy), or true post-scarcity future economic models need to be created. There are no alternatives where really rich people get everything and everyone else just dies. (Sorry plutocrats, but that is how you destroy the human race, not live immortal, pampered lives.)
There is only one equation the human race needs to figure out in order to survive.
Solve for Greed.
Plutocrats turning the planet into a global Welfare state as Greed funds UBI at the lowest level possible will likely result in another concept coming to fruition.
Eat the Rich.
Regardless if people fight the idea or not, automation and AI decimating the concept and capability of human employment is no longer science fiction. And when US states started crying out for $15 minimum wage rates, the initial response back from corporations was to look towards automation, because that option was now worth the investment.
Coming to the conclusion that automation and AI would target countries with higher wage costs seems to be rather obvious. The real question is what will be done to control unending Greed from turning the planet into a Welfare state.
We keep talking about UBI, which is another concept that will become inevitable as automation and AI decimate human employment. The problem lies with funding UBI, which will likely be done through taxation. Unfortunately, corporations are some of the worst entities when it comes to actually paying taxes by employing armies of lobbyists to minimize or hide those obligations, with the end result being trillions sitting in offshore tax havens today. Since this will never change, unending Greed will all but guarantee that UBI will become nothing more than Welfare 2.0 for the masses.
You can forget the American Dream. You can forget the Human Dream. The reality of automation and AI is a global Welfare state, all because of Greed.