Oh, I guess I should have been more clear. I wasn't talking about the most recent centuries, I was referring to the utter stagnation during the middle ages.
Yet somehow people got fed.
You're conflating "how much information a researcher generates" with "the percentage change in ability to crunch that information." By the same logic, agriculture had 0 productivity for centuries, as farmers remained unable to improve their yield per effort.
If it made Experian go out of business, and the other two invest heavily in security to prevent another event (or even if they don't and are subsequently put out of business), that's fine. I'd like to be made whole, but since that's not going to happen, let some lawyer take the cash.
Your first scenario is not going to happen. What will happen is once every year or so, someone will make them fire up the VR stuff during a meeting, and half the meeting will involve waiting for tech ops to set it back up.
VR is fine for annotating factory equipment orother 3D things. But most movies barely use 2D imagery.
You're right, they're just naively reporting things strangers say on the Internet as true. Because obviously FB believes those statistics, and not just because it's in their financial interest.
Although, I do have some money I need to move out of Nigeria, and if you help me move some of my royal inheritance to another bank I'll split it with you.
Sure I do. I imagine the first company to cure cancer will get a huge bump in stock price in the short term, which the CEO will then cash out on as he switches to, I dunno, making cars. Along the way, he'll be lauded as a hero.
There aren't many times when I think the stock market's short term profit obsession is good, but this is one of them.
So, you're saying that the researcher is stupid because he doesn't know Facebook's data is bad... when the point he is making is that Facebook lies about its data?
One reason that it might not be classified as a monopoly is that WE can easily bring Google down.
No, we really cannot. All of society could. But, all of slashdot is a rounding error of a rounding error. But the same thing was true when MS put IE into windows. Turns out, it doesn't really work.
You left out "theft of services". See, stealing electricity to power your devices is pretty serious; it was originally written to go after those who evade power bills. But it's also been applied to stealing electricity for bugs within someone's home (ironically, for a time, those were the primary laws that were used to prosecute such crimes.)
I value my nights and weekends too much to sell them for a $600 phone every year. Also, if you ever have a falling out with your employer, you may find that you don't own the phone/data on it.
(1) Changing batteries is more convenient than an external battery, especially because the large and fragile plug that needs to be shoved into the phone. (2) Batteries do lose life in far less than 3 years. Being able to replace a battery, when it's often the only thing wrong with a phone, is a form of future-proofing and extending the lifetime of the phone. But then again, I'd never lease a phone.
Your philosophy has quite a few failure points. For instance, a second hand piece of furniture is not going to be usable as collatoral (antiques aside). Yet, it certainly seems like it could be worthy of buying on a credit card, even if it takes a few months to pay off. Certainly, even with interest, it is going to be cheaper than a new piece of comparable furniture, and will last longer than a piece of presswood crap.
Pet peeve: Blockbuster did not dig in their heels. They spent hundreds of millions trying to build a streaming service in 1998/1999, prior to Netflix. Their contractor turned out to be be running a giant scam (not just on Blockbuster, it was a multi-billion dollar scam), and took their money and market position and blew it.
Look, there are plenty of examples of companies failing to anticipate the future, there's no reason to conflate that with the ones that fail to correctly implement what they can see.
I can search Google with a screen, keyboard and mouse, you know. At Quantum Mechanics is just differential equations, so "doing them in your head" isn't terribly interesting. Certainly, it's easier to do them by by having a computer solve them, but then again, I can do that with keyboard and mouse.
Of course they discontinued that useful feature. They make more money the more searches you make on their site. Therefore, they only want to be slightly better than Bing (and more famous than DDG),
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I guess I should have been more clear. I wasn't talking about the most recent centuries, I was referring to the utter stagnation during the middle ages. Yet somehow people got fed.
You're conflating "how much information a researcher generates" with "the percentage change in ability to crunch that information." By the same logic, agriculture had 0 productivity for centuries, as farmers remained unable to improve their yield per effort.
He should be down-modded for using a fixed width tag for something other than math/code.
If it made Experian go out of business, and the other two invest heavily in security to prevent another event (or even if they don't and are subsequently put out of business), that's fine. I'd like to be made whole, but since that's not going to happen, let some lawyer take the cash.
Your first scenario is not going to happen. What will happen is once every year or so, someone will make them fire up the VR stuff during a meeting, and half the meeting will involve waiting for tech ops to set it back up.
VR is fine for annotating factory equipment orother 3D things. But most movies barely use 2D imagery.
You're right, they're just naively reporting things strangers say on the Internet as true. Because obviously FB believes those statistics, and not just because it's in their financial interest.
Although, I do have some money I need to move out of Nigeria, and if you help me move some of my royal inheritance to another bank I'll split it with you.
Sure I do. I imagine the first company to cure cancer will get a huge bump in stock price in the short term, which the CEO will then cash out on as he switches to, I dunno, making cars. Along the way, he'll be lauded as a hero.
There aren't many times when I think the stock market's short term profit obsession is good, but this is one of them.
So, you're saying that the researcher is stupid because he doesn't know Facebook's data is bad... when the point he is making is that Facebook lies about its data?
No, we really cannot. All of society could. But, all of slashdot is a rounding error of a rounding error. But the same thing was true when MS put IE into windows. Turns out, it doesn't really work.
So they should give people money, so they can get back more money? Why even run the robots then?
I mean, they'll be run enough to keep the peons from revolting, but only until robot soldiers can keep the starving masses from taking their stuff.
Beyond that, I watch shows for enjoyment. Rarely do I even want to retain the plot of a movie/show 140 days in the future.
The company's toilet, the plumbing connection, and the water flowing through it all "DO BELONG" to the company as well.
You left out "theft of services". See, stealing electricity to power your devices is pretty serious; it was originally written to go after those who evade power bills. But it's also been applied to stealing electricity for bugs within someone's home (ironically, for a time, those were the primary laws that were used to prosecute such crimes.)
Gee, it sucks that big successful corporations have to obey the laws
I value my nights and weekends too much to sell them for a $600 phone every year. Also, if you ever have a falling out with your employer, you may find that you don't own the phone/data on it.
I have a solution - buy a cheap non-Android phone. They tend to work pretty well without problems.
(1) Changing batteries is more convenient than an external battery, especially because the large and fragile plug that needs to be shoved into the phone. (2) Batteries do lose life in far less than 3 years. Being able to replace a battery, when it's often the only thing wrong with a phone, is a form of future-proofing and extending the lifetime of the phone. But then again, I'd never lease a phone.
Your philosophy has quite a few failure points. For instance, a second hand piece of furniture is not going to be usable as collatoral (antiques aside). Yet, it certainly seems like it could be worthy of buying on a credit card, even if it takes a few months to pay off. Certainly, even with interest, it is going to be cheaper than a new piece of comparable furniture, and will last longer than a piece of presswood crap.
Pet peeve: Blockbuster did not dig in their heels. They spent hundreds of millions trying to build a streaming service in 1998/1999, prior to Netflix. Their contractor turned out to be be running a giant scam (not just on Blockbuster, it was a multi-billion dollar scam), and took their money and market position and blew it.
Look, there are plenty of examples of companies failing to anticipate the future, there's no reason to conflate that with the ones that fail to correctly implement what they can see.
While war may be the most famous cause, PTSD has a lot of non-war causes as well.
I'm not sure any billionaire deserves the right to be anonymous. When you accumulate that much power, knowing who you are seems important.
I should point out that the data used would not be classified as metadata.
You're supposed to post the multiple related xkcds. This one, especially the alt-text is also pertinent.
I can search Google with a screen, keyboard and mouse, you know. At Quantum Mechanics is just differential equations, so "doing them in your head" isn't terribly interesting. Certainly, it's easier to do them by by having a computer solve them, but then again, I can do that with keyboard and mouse.
Of course they discontinued that useful feature. They make more money the more searches you make on their site. Therefore, they only want to be slightly better than Bing (and more famous than DDG),