I believe most places with universal coverage allow a secondary private market, if that's what you mean. I don't really care if Jobs was able to afford a private doctor (or team) at the end of his life - I care if other people cannot get cancer treatment because of we preserve that as an option.
Also, if they have physical access to your Samsung TV (for the USB based hack), they could add their own microphones throughout the body, wired into a battery so unplugging it doesn't turn it off.
So convince people to use Java. Javascript is just even worse trhan that. Or use open source and recompile. There are like 1000 other solutions that don't confuse "software is crossplatform" and "software should auto-run in a browser when you visit a webpage".
During WWII, the US put various limits in place on resource allocation. One of those things was a wartime limit on salary. That meant employers added benefits instead. One was health insurance. I guess it became expected.
kinda, but mostly because the stupid things I say and do probably won't come back to haunt me when I use Snapchat. Messages disappear. And aren't you the one telling me to scrub my online present and watch for my privacy.
Just make sure your niece understands that messages "disappear", but can be retained by people she messages (or hackers or other agents). Especially if she thinks SC protects her ability to send images of herself without risk.
Oh, sure. If you want to say that oversight is lacking and needs to be improved, I can probably be convinced (not being aware enough on the actual amount of oversight present.) But I have no reason to think that these leaks cover materials not subject to the proper oversight. And I'm certainly not happy about these leaks -- they solely cover technical capability and not illegitimate uses of said capability.
The rich can't get richer if the masses can't afford to buy the shiny new toys being made by the robots.
Why? I mean, how would it help a rich person get a fancier yacht if I want to buy a new backscratcher? Unless, for some reason, the rich person needed my assistance to build the yacht, it seems easier for him just to have the robot produce a yacht instead of have teh robot make a backscratcher, that another robot (aka Amazon) sells to me, that a drone delivers, so that I send money, that somehow turns into a yacht.
a free poor people would create a black market doing jobs for and trading with each other using an alternate currency, essentially invalidating the non-material wealth of the 1%
You're right that an alternate currency would pop up, but that wouldn't change the value of the 1%'s land, stock, IP, robots, factories, etc. And if you wanted any of that, you'd have to use the rich people currency at whatever exchange rate that required.
So, literally the only thing that matters is being in a position to win a war?
No, that's a very bad strawman of my position. My position is that constraining the government to be able to use the amount of force I can personally fend off with a small-arm is very bad. Sure, it means I'm safe from the tyranny of my own government, but I imagine that means another country would quickly invade and conquer it. I want my government to have all kinds of weapons like tanks and drones.
I feel the same is true with cyber weapons. As I pointed out, I'm not concerned about my individual safety if the government decides to intercept my (specific) communications. In no small part, if they needed to, they could show up at my house and take my phone and make me unlock it. I have no illusions about being able to fight off the army or withstand determined interrogation. That said, there are safeguards (legal, cultural, etc.) that should prevent them from doing so, or provide me recourse if they do. So long as those same safeguards apply, I see no difference between them hitting my until they know my password or them using a vulnerability to get it.
(Totally offtopic, but absolute dictatorships tend to lose wars vs. democracies.)
Of course I knew this was going on. Not only that, I expect and approve that it goes on. I want my country to have the best fucking weapons to use and the best intelligence on other countries. Yes, it's power. But unilateral disarmament just leads to a Russian flag over the capitol.
Yes, dragnets are bad. But so far these have all been targetted things. I have no illusion that the US government could read my mail, listen to my phone, use a stealthy drone with night vision, or otherwise montior everything I do. I have no problem with that capability. I only have a problem if they have the ability to do that to the entire population. Because one way is dealt with by warrants or specific enemies, and the other is used as a dragnet to control the population.
Hell, if the government wants to, I'm under no illusion I could stop them from killing me. Killing me dead. Or beating me with a wrench til I give them all my passwords. Again, I don't really have a problem with them having that capability.
We used to (and still do!) have wireless TV. It offers far fewer channels with all kinds of reception problems, and that's using it as one-to-many solution that broadcasts at whatever time it feels is appropriate. Cable actually grew up because of all the transmission problems. And honestly, I don't know why anyone would prefer a wireless connection over fiber? Ever. Maybe within your home on 2.4 or 5.4 spectra.
Now I would much rather see Alphabet (Google) buy Sprint. That could enhance the competitive marketplace for home Internet and video instead of constrict it.
Maybe for a year or two, but then it would be abandoned because broadband^W headsets^W themostats^W cellphones^W hardware is hard.
Except that it was a law championed by President Bush, and signed by him. Actually, the first version was signed by Bush the Elder, and the revision was signed by Bush the Younger. So, you know, two Bushes.
The idea was that it's wrong to make handicapped people unable to participate in society.
That is why most software packages have this very specific disclaimer: "You acknowledge that Software is not designed, licensed or intended for... in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility."
I think the real reason is that there are limitations on exporting code designed for nuclear facilities. So it's more a "please don't ship me to Gitmo for letting an Iranian use my software" than a disavowal of liability in case of mushroom clouds.
What happens when it takes your money and goes "beep" but delivers no food? Who will take your complaint?
CC company; have them reverse the charges. Honestly, CC companies are a better tool than most consumer protection agencies at fixing problems like that.
This is really, really wrong on all fronts. But especially becuase Lyft pays better than Uber. It may not be morals, but because they are smaller and have to. I'd like to break it down.
Lyft does not set the rate up front. It's still a range, and you still see surge charging.
Uber still shows surge charginge. But while Lyft shows the expected range, Uber charges by miles and time.... and lists the minimum charge if you can go the speed limit. Every Uber charge* is "$15 and up", so if you hit traffic, the meter is still running. (*Except UberPool.) So they don't show the expected max. But it is not Fixed Price. Which def. means a driver can make more by circling the block
You still have the option of tipping (and are encouraged to), which is a shitty way to not pay your employees and to pass that responsibility onto your customers
IN addition to the tip, Lyft drivers make 80% to 100% of the fares, with that number going up during rush hour and if they drive during specific hours. In fact, if a Lyft driver drives it in every rush hour for a month, they get 100% of their fares - for the whole month. Uber pays the driver 80%, but also collects an additional 20% mandatory tip on top of the fare. So much for your "upfront package" again.
Additionally, when you lease a car from Uber, that's a regular car lease. When you lease it from Lyft, Lyft will pay off your monthly payment on a sliding scale depening on how much you drive for them.
So, as a profession, Lyft is way better for their contractors. Based on the quotes last night, it is way cheaper for me. And it's not run by an asshole (or at least the asshole is well behaved in public).
No, it has fewer instructions, but this algorithm fucks the cache right up. First you copy the four values to registers, then do the sort on the register values and one CPU, then output them. Otherwise, the compiler will flush your data back with each swap in case another CPU needs it.
I cannot wait for a day when only people able to answer (fairly basic) software engineering questions can fly. Security will be a snap. Of course, I assumed I can answer the questions for them -- otherwise I'll be going sans my family and most of my friends.
The most surprising part of that is that questions were pretty decent. Although an abstract class is not a universal concept, and I'm not sure if we should be limiting things by choice of language. After all, we're the land of the free...
In fairness, the docking station you describe was attempted by... was it motorola... on a specific line of android phones. It failed miserably (at least commercially).
The 3+ range went down. It's not amazing that the 1-2 range went up and the 0 range went up. In fact, that's exactly how percentages work if some TVs simply disappeared. And in direct contrast to what you said in the OP:
What we learned today is that over a period of 5 years, some people sold an extra TV and others bought an extra TV.
No, investors like greedy, competent, intelligent psychopaths whose interests are aligned with their own. They don't like assholes who fuck people over without making them and the asshole money.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, except they don't. Most people hate their health insurance company.
I believe most places with universal coverage allow a secondary private market, if that's what you mean. I don't really care if Jobs was able to afford a private doctor (or team) at the end of his life - I care if other people cannot get cancer treatment because of we preserve that as an option.
Also, if they have physical access to your Samsung TV (for the USB based hack), they could add their own microphones throughout the body, wired into a battery so unplugging it doesn't turn it off.
So convince people to use Java. Javascript is just even worse trhan that. Or use open source and recompile. There are like 1000 other solutions that don't confuse "software is crossplatform" and "software should auto-run in a browser when you visit a webpage".
During WWII, the US put various limits in place on resource allocation. One of those things was a wartime limit on salary. That meant employers added benefits instead. One was health insurance. I guess it became expected.
Just make sure your niece understands that messages "disappear", but can be retained by people she messages (or hackers or other agents). Especially if she thinks SC protects her ability to send images of herself without risk.
Oh, sure. If you want to say that oversight is lacking and needs to be improved, I can probably be convinced (not being aware enough on the actual amount of oversight present.) But I have no reason to think that these leaks cover materials not subject to the proper oversight. And I'm certainly not happy about these leaks -- they solely cover technical capability and not illegitimate uses of said capability.
Why? I mean, how would it help a rich person get a fancier yacht if I want to buy a new backscratcher? Unless, for some reason, the rich person needed my assistance to build the yacht, it seems easier for him just to have the robot produce a yacht instead of have teh robot make a backscratcher, that another robot (aka Amazon) sells to me, that a drone delivers, so that I send money, that somehow turns into a yacht.
You're right that an alternate currency would pop up, but that wouldn't change the value of the 1%'s land, stock, IP, robots, factories, etc. And if you wanted any of that, you'd have to use the rich people currency at whatever exchange rate that required.
No, that's a very bad strawman of my position. My position is that constraining the government to be able to use the amount of force I can personally fend off with a small-arm is very bad. Sure, it means I'm safe from the tyranny of my own government, but I imagine that means another country would quickly invade and conquer it. I want my government to have all kinds of weapons like tanks and drones.
I feel the same is true with cyber weapons. As I pointed out, I'm not concerned about my individual safety if the government decides to intercept my (specific) communications. In no small part, if they needed to, they could show up at my house and take my phone and make me unlock it. I have no illusions about being able to fight off the army or withstand determined interrogation. That said, there are safeguards (legal, cultural, etc.) that should prevent them from doing so, or provide me recourse if they do. So long as those same safeguards apply, I see no difference between them hitting my until they know my password or them using a vulnerability to get it.
(Totally offtopic, but absolute dictatorships tend to lose wars vs. democracies.)
No, I'm not worried about a boogeyman. I am worried about my country being at a disadvantage in a war. Cause, you know, they happen.
Of course I knew this was going on. Not only that, I expect and approve that it goes on. I want my country to have the best fucking weapons to use and the best intelligence on other countries. Yes, it's power. But unilateral disarmament just leads to a Russian flag over the capitol.
Yes, dragnets are bad. But so far these have all been targetted things. I have no illusion that the US government could read my mail, listen to my phone, use a stealthy drone with night vision, or otherwise montior everything I do. I have no problem with that capability. I only have a problem if they have the ability to do that to the entire population. Because one way is dealt with by warrants or specific enemies, and the other is used as a dragnet to control the population.
Hell, if the government wants to, I'm under no illusion I could stop them from killing me. Killing me dead. Or beating me with a wrench til I give them all my passwords. Again, I don't really have a problem with them having that capability.
We used to (and still do!) have wireless TV. It offers far fewer channels with all kinds of reception problems, and that's using it as one-to-many solution that broadcasts at whatever time it feels is appropriate. Cable actually grew up because of all the transmission problems. And honestly, I don't know why anyone would prefer a wireless connection over fiber? Ever. Maybe within your home on 2.4 or 5.4 spectra.
Maybe for a year or two, but then it would be abandoned because broadband^W headsets^W themostats^W cellphones^W hardware is hard.
Seriously, Alphabet doesn't do hardware well.
Except that it was a law championed by President Bush, and signed by him. Actually, the first version was signed by Bush the Elder, and the revision was signed by Bush the Younger. So, you know, two Bushes.
The idea was that it's wrong to make handicapped people unable to participate in society.
I think the real reason is that there are limitations on exporting code designed for nuclear facilities. So it's more a "please don't ship me to Gitmo for letting an Iranian use my software" than a disavowal of liability in case of mushroom clouds.
CC company; have them reverse the charges. Honestly, CC companies are a better tool than most consumer protection agencies at fixing problems like that.
Actually, OG famously doesn't even salt their water for the pasta. It would void the warranty on their pots.
Seriously. It was reported in 2014 and still happening in 2016
Yeah, that's like me "proposing an end to emacs/vi war" by suggesting everyone uninstall emacs*. It bakes in the side you want to win.
*I flipped a coin. No way was I going to reveal a real preference on such a hotly contested issue.
The friends are likely to be actual friends, who already have jobs, and who answer the questions so their friend seems competent.
This is really, really wrong on all fronts. But especially becuase Lyft pays better than Uber. It may not be morals, but because they are smaller and have to. I'd like to break it down.
Uber still shows surge charginge. But while Lyft shows the expected range, Uber charges by miles and time.... and lists the minimum charge if you can go the speed limit. Every Uber charge* is "$15 and up", so if you hit traffic, the meter is still running. (*Except UberPool.) So they don't show the expected max. But it is not Fixed Price. Which def. means a driver can make more by circling the block
IN addition to the tip, Lyft drivers make 80% to 100% of the fares, with that number going up during rush hour and if they drive during specific hours. In fact, if a Lyft driver drives it in every rush hour for a month, they get 100% of their fares - for the whole month. Uber pays the driver 80%, but also collects an additional 20% mandatory tip on top of the fare. So much for your "upfront package" again.
Additionally, when you lease a car from Uber, that's a regular car lease. When you lease it from Lyft, Lyft will pay off your monthly payment on a sliding scale depening on how much you drive for them.
So, as a profession, Lyft is way better for their contractors. Based on the quotes last night, it is way cheaper for me. And it's not run by an asshole (or at least the asshole is well behaved in public).
No, it has fewer instructions, but this algorithm fucks the cache right up. First you copy the four values to registers, then do the sort on the register values and one CPU, then output them. Otherwise, the compiler will flush your data back with each swap in case another CPU needs it.
(Only applies to multiprocessor systems)
I cannot wait for a day when only people able to answer (fairly basic) software engineering questions can fly. Security will be a snap. Of course, I assumed I can answer the questions for them -- otherwise I'll be going sans my family and most of my friends.
The most surprising part of that is that questions were pretty decent. Although an abstract class is not a universal concept, and I'm not sure if we should be limiting things by choice of language. After all, we're the land of the free...
In fairness, the docking station you describe was attempted by... was it motorola... on a specific line of android phones. It failed miserably (at least commercially).
The 3+ range went down. It's not amazing that the 1-2 range went up and the 0 range went up. In fact, that's exactly how percentages work if some TVs simply disappeared. And in direct contrast to what you said in the OP:
No, investors like greedy, competent, intelligent psychopaths whose interests are aligned with their own. They don't like assholes who fuck people over without making them and the asshole money.