Now you know that this is a class action suit. But I don't think it is a good idea in the US legal system. Reasons :
1. one initial weakly fought class action suit indemnifies the defendant from a proper class action suit for this topic, and somewhat related topics.
2. the customers get nearly nothing, company loses some money so that future products for the customers are more expensive, and the lawyers get tons of money. All 3 of these monetary transactions are bad for the customers.
Nonsense. The computer only needs to be markedly better than an *average* driver to be a huge safety win. It doesn't even need to *always* be better than the average driver - if it can reliably avoid 90% of the most common accidents, then even it it fails spectacularly in the last 10% of edge cases, and even if humans would have avoided 100% of those, the autonomous systems will still have reduced the number of accidents by a factor of 9.
It only needs to be so to be useful. But it needs to be far better to be perceived to be useful. Because humans - regulators, law-enforcers and car buyers do not think like that.
If an automated car drives 10 times better than average, that is zero advantage. Because an average driver perceives himself as 10 times better than average.
Then there is the issue of control - driving a car seems safer to most people even today than flying as a passenger in an aircraft, because in an aircraft passengers do not control the possibility of accidents. In a car, the driver decides how much risk he takes, and a huge majority of drivers think they are taking zero risk.
If B were truly anonymous, then A would not be able to Bully him. Go ahead, try bullying an anonymous coward on slashdot. The idea doesn't even make sense.
Ability to remain anonymous legally in a jurisdiction does not mean everyone is completely anonymous. Ability to carry a loaded gun does not mean everyone carries and is trained to use one. Anonymity in the bullying case is so similar to guns, even fallacies are alike !!
The outbreak of Facebook has ensured 99% of internet users are "effectively de-anonymized". An outbreak of a similar disease in the gun world would ensure guns are rendered useless as a defence too, by de-gunning 99% people.
So what? His pseudo identity will be booted / ip banned, his comments deleted etc.
1. No, online platforms today have done a horrible job in protecting most cases of bullying. There is no reason why de-anonymization laws in one country will suddenly make all online platforms completely cooperative with that one country's vicims in relieving them of the bullying. It is a huge uphill battle to even convince Facebook that a registered account is bullying. Many of those online platforms are not based in that country.
Even if they did get so cooperative suddenly, the bully can change identities and bully again.
"Polite society" can trivially banish and ignore the 'anon' person, and there's nothing he can do about it.
If there were a polite society, online bullying wouldn't be allowed to go so out of control, even without anonymity.
Nothing like guns.... The guy with the gun can't simply be tossed out... because he has a gun.
The childish argument of gun superiority. A person you don't know, don't see, attacks from any direction, and cannot be attacked back s infinitely more terrifying than a steel nerved, gun wielding, shooting champion enemy who is de-anonymized.
No, cross country you just need HV. DC comes handy when there are too many suppliers with independent problems and synchronization issues between them cause trouble all over the grid. But DC isn't fundamentally necessary just because transmission is cross country.
And no one does 3000 miles at 110 V. Transmission (long distance) grade voltage starts at 110 kV and above.
So the virus is not "smart". A "smart" virus doesn't kill most of its hosts, at least for a long time. The hosts then spread the virus around and virus propagates.
Though Ebola virus is smart about staying comfortably in fruit bats without killing the bats.
Those 3 that I listed are the implications of being outdated.
No.
a) Cost of integration. As time passes the system fits less well with the rest of the software / hardware ecosystem
Time passes continuously. Time doesn't start passing once jbolden threshold of outdatedness is attained.
b) Cost of transitioning at a later date. There is a window to transition after that it becomes a very complex project.
This is very arbitrary as some essential assumptions are not mentioned, but presumably this is not directly related to outdatedness but an effect of even more time passing after something getting outdated.
c) Cost of maintaining and modifying. As knowledge of the system decreases this can skyrocket
You haven't proven knowledge must decrease. Use of knowledge, as well as its decrease, are dependent on purpose which you refuse to discuss.
Society cannot be "equal". Males cannot get pregnant. Females cannot successfully mate with multiple partners per mating season. These essential limitations, and many more differences make it impossible for a society to be "equal".
Implicit in feminism is the realization that we live in a male-dominated society, not a female-dominated one
So you are saying that feminism is not "the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men". But according to you, feminism is, instead, a belief that we live in a male-dominated society along with the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men. You intentionally hid this important fact to promote feminism as an equitable belief system, and not poisoned. But since I pointed out the contradiction in your definition, the lid is blown. How do you avoid to accept now that feminism, is indeed poisoned as claimed by the earlier post.
Secondly - "the realization that we live in a male-dominated society, not a female-dominated one". This is a highly childish statement with an implicit assumption that society is either male-dominated, or female dominated. This implicit assumption is false. Some people dominate others, of either sex.
In your hypothetical female-dominated society
I did not hypothesize any female-dominated society.
I think you could put both those ideas under the umbrella of humanism, which puts humans and their well-being at the centre of our moral universe.
If you called it humanism, which is much less poisoned, the original poster wouldn't have claimed it poisoned and I wouldn't have needed to expose your facade.
If outdated is defined without a purpose, what are the real life implications of something being outdated? You yourself admit that they are fit for some purposes.
Yes, now the definition moves from imprecise to useless. The other remaining deficiency is that it still doesn't define the purpose for which it is outdated - for developing latest software to sell to currently selling and upcoming versions of the operating systems - yes it is outdated. For running your DNS server, browsing slashdot after adequate safeguards? No, only an idiot would call it outdated for that purpose.
Why useless? Just because something is defined as outdated by jbolden without even taking into account the purpose , doesn't mean anything as to the usefulness of using it. Which was my original point - it is mental masturbation having no impact on real life.
A user keeps a machine for a purpose, and not for the sake of keeping the machine. Any definition of "outdated" that doesn't define "outdated for what purpose?" is useless mental masturbation.
So if the Windows XP machine does its job, it is not outdated for its purpose. If an application runs currently, it is "current application" for the purpose of running. So the Windows XP machine runs "current applications".
It does not run some software being produced today. The machine is outdated for running those software. But running them is not the purpose, so the machine is not outdated for its purpose.
Feminism is the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men
No, it cannot possibly be. Because it implies men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women. So by that logic it can be renamed as masculism.
A thought experiment proves that no feminist would accept this renaming - even though it espouses the exact same idea. The ideas "women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men" and "men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women" ARE the exact same ideas.
It is mentioned clearly why they didn't include vim and emacs. One of the reasons is stupid (both of these have a steep learning curve), but the other and primary reason is sound. You don't need to switch however great the 5 tested editors turn out to be.
So Vim and emacs were declared winners before the race started. I see that you are not a fan of paralympics, but paralympics are somewhat entertaining and instructive.
Not sure what you mean. In case there is some confusion, in a lot of unofficial Oracle communication, "NT" means all Microsoft operating systems based on Windows NT. Some other old school software companies also use the word "NT" for this meaning even today.
A is bullying B online. So A is already a criminal. Both A and B are anonymous. Anonymity gives A the advantage of being difficult to catch. Anonymity gives B the advantage that less details about B are available to A for bullying. In extreme situation, B can online regenerate i.e. remove the online identities that A is bullying and recreate other identities that A will not be able to find. Because of online anonymity, B has these extreme measures available.
Now outlaw online anonymity. A is a criminal, he will not think twice before using VPN / proxy / tor. Probably he is already physically abroad, making legislators of the victim B's country powerless in outlawing A's online anonymity. So A is still anonymous. B lost anonymity - so A now has more online information to bully B with.
Very similar to guns. Not sure why you don't see it.
books are only entertainment only for idiots
on
Amazon's eBook Math
·
· Score: 1
There are a lot more books than books for entertainment. Idiots don't know this.
Doesn't matter whether it is good. Sometimes stopping something bad is worse - an example is alcohol and the worse effects of prohibition.
Alcohol gives nothing indispensible, and if alcoholic drinks were not invented, it arguably wouldn't have been an impediment to society. But once alcohol is invented, prohibition typically has an even worse effect.
Suppose alcoholic drinks were being invented today, one might ask whether it is a good invention, and arguably get a truthful answer in "no". But that answer doesn't matter. Similarly, information might not want to be free or want anything at all being inanimate, but technology is at such a stage where preventing copying entails unacceptable surveilance.
Xposed requires root. Why do so many more GNU/Linux devices than Android devices come with root? And how do I get a headphone jack fixed after I have voided the warranty by having installed a rooted ROM?
I don't understand how people use Android devices without root. Not even a firewall !! Check the headphone jack before rooting. And don't break after it within a year - after which you'll have no warranty anyway for most devices.
By that standard, using software in GNU/Linux is not really looking beyond Novell because just as Wine is a free reimplementation of Windows API, GNU/Linux is a free reimplementation of UNIX.
That is ok because there is not much of a need to look beyond Novell. There is also something called open (relatively) specification, and a bigger something called target platform. GNU/Linux is great for software where GNU/Linux is the target platform. Wine is great for software where wine is the target platform - which isn't for much of software.
So this is a very bad example. Free reimplementation doesn't matter in looking beyond, but other aspects of Microsoft's and others' behaviour around the ecosystem matters. Brings me back ot my original point, this is similar to how Android sucks, but Cyanogenmod / AOSP / Xposed rock.
How should I "research" thoroughly if the product isn't even available for inspection in my geographic area?
I currently run Xubuntu on my 10" laptop. But I use Intel for two reasons. One is that operating systems that ship on popular ARM devices tend to have window management policies that are all maximized all the time. The Android CDD explicitly has no provision for resizable windows
The great thing about Android is not Android itself - but the hacker community around it. The Xposed framework has utter disregard for the Android CDD - and supports 2 applications side by side. You might have to make sure it works for the specific device. Or rather, you might have to find a way to make it work for the specific device.
The other is that three applications that I use regularly are not ported to GNU/Linux (FamiTracker, Modplug Tracker, and FCEUX debugger version), and I run them through Wine. Or have I just painted myself into a "too niche for hardware makers to bother" corner?
This is a bigger problem. Using software in wine is not really looking beyond Microsoft.
How would one go about returning something that one finds unsuitable?
One wouldn't. Research, buy, take responsibility. The idiot mentality US has encouraged where sue-happy buyer has zero responsibility for even understanding the idea of the device he is buying is the reason for companies to not offer interesting things in the US - epecially in electronics.
Highly uninformative post as it doesn't mention this situation is only for NT. On UNIXes, port 1521 (or whatever port is selected in installer) is enough.
Oracle's emphasis is rarely on Microsoft's operating systems. Not only in RDBMS, but many other products support UNIXes primarily, and Microsoft's operating systems secondarily.
Right. So you need to look beyond Intel and Microsoft. Lenovo IdeaPad A10 - 10.1 inch, quad core cortex A9, Android, tiny charger, weighs a kilogram with charger. If you don't find it in the US, probably buy from China because the US is bought and paid for by Intel and Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
Now you know that this is a class action suit. But I don't think it is a good idea in the US legal system. Reasons :
1. one initial weakly fought class action suit indemnifies the defendant from a proper class action suit for this topic, and somewhat related topics.
2. the customers get nearly nothing, company loses some money so that future products for the customers are more expensive, and the lawyers get tons of money. All 3 of these monetary transactions are bad for the customers.
Nonsense. The computer only needs to be markedly better than an *average* driver to be a huge safety win. It doesn't even need to *always* be better than the average driver - if it can reliably avoid 90% of the most common accidents, then even it it fails spectacularly in the last 10% of edge cases, and even if humans would have avoided 100% of those, the autonomous systems will still have reduced the number of accidents by a factor of 9.
It only needs to be so to be useful. But it needs to be far better to be perceived to be useful. Because humans - regulators, law-enforcers and car buyers do not think like that.
If an automated car drives 10 times better than average, that is zero advantage. Because an average driver perceives himself as 10 times better than average.
Then there is the issue of control - driving a car seems safer to most people even today than flying as a passenger in an aircraft, because in an aircraft passengers do not control the possibility of accidents. In a car, the driver decides how much risk he takes, and a huge majority of drivers think they are taking zero risk.
If B were truly anonymous, then A would not be able to Bully him. Go ahead, try bullying an anonymous coward on slashdot. The idea doesn't even make sense.
Ability to remain anonymous legally in a jurisdiction does not mean everyone is completely anonymous. Ability to carry a loaded gun does not mean everyone carries and is trained to use one. Anonymity in the bullying case is so similar to guns, even fallacies are alike !!
The outbreak of Facebook has ensured 99% of internet users are "effectively de-anonymized". An outbreak of a similar disease in the gun world would ensure guns are rendered useless as a defence too, by de-gunning 99% people.
So what? His pseudo identity will be booted / ip banned, his comments deleted etc.
1. No, online platforms today have done a horrible job in protecting most cases of bullying. There is no reason why de-anonymization laws in one country will suddenly make all online platforms completely cooperative with that one country's vicims in relieving them of the bullying. It is a huge uphill battle to even convince Facebook that a registered account is bullying. Many of those online platforms are not based in that country.
Even if they did get so cooperative suddenly, the bully can change identities and bully again.
"Polite society" can trivially banish and ignore the 'anon' person, and there's nothing he can do about it.
If there were a polite society, online bullying wouldn't be allowed to go so out of control, even without anonymity.
Nothing like guns. ... The guy with the gun can't simply be tossed out ... because he has a gun.
The childish argument of gun superiority. A person you don't know, don't see, attacks from any direction, and cannot be attacked back s infinitely more terrifying than a steel nerved, gun wielding, shooting champion enemy who is de-anonymized.
No, cross country you just need HV. DC comes handy when there are too many suppliers with independent problems and synchronization issues between them cause trouble all over the grid. But DC isn't fundamentally necessary just because transmission is cross country.
And no one does 3000 miles at 110 V. Transmission (long distance) grade voltage starts at 110 kV and above.
So the virus is not "smart". A "smart" virus doesn't kill most of its hosts, at least for a long time. The hosts then spread the virus around and virus propagates.
Though Ebola virus is smart about staying comfortably in fruit bats without killing the bats.
Caution : The women will not be pretty.
Those 3 that I listed are the implications of being outdated.
No.
a) Cost of integration. As time passes the system fits less well with the rest of the software / hardware ecosystem
Time passes continuously. Time doesn't start passing once jbolden threshold of outdatedness is attained.
b) Cost of transitioning at a later date. There is a window to transition after that it becomes a very complex project.
This is very arbitrary as some essential assumptions are not mentioned, but presumably this is not directly related to outdatedness but an effect of even more time passing after something getting outdated.
c) Cost of maintaining and modifying. As knowledge of the system decreases this can skyrocket
You haven't proven knowledge must decrease. Use of knowledge, as well as its decrease, are dependent on purpose which you refuse to discuss.
So no, these are not answers to my questions.
Society cannot be "equal". Males cannot get pregnant. Females cannot successfully mate with multiple partners per mating season. These essential limitations, and many more differences make it impossible for a society to be "equal".
Implicit in feminism is the realization that we live in a male-dominated society, not a female-dominated one
So you are saying that feminism is not "the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men". But according to you, feminism is, instead, a belief that we live in a male-dominated society along with the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men. You intentionally hid this important fact to promote feminism as an equitable belief system, and not poisoned. But since I pointed out the contradiction in your definition, the lid is blown. How do you avoid to accept now that feminism, is indeed poisoned as claimed by the earlier post.
Secondly - "the realization that we live in a male-dominated society, not a female-dominated one". This is a highly childish statement with an implicit assumption that society is either male-dominated, or female dominated. This implicit assumption is false. Some people dominate others, of either sex.
In your hypothetical female-dominated society
I did not hypothesize any female-dominated society.
I think you could put both those ideas under the umbrella of humanism, which puts humans and their well-being at the centre of our moral universe.
If you called it humanism, which is much less poisoned, the original poster wouldn't have claimed it poisoned and I wouldn't have needed to expose your facade.
Cost is a noun, I asked the implications.
I asked the implications of something being "outdated" , not those of time passing.
So it's not outdated for running DNS servers !
If outdated is defined without a purpose, what are the real life implications of something being outdated? You yourself admit that they are fit for some purposes.
Yes, now the definition moves from imprecise to useless. The other remaining deficiency is that it still doesn't define the purpose for which it is outdated - for developing latest software to sell to currently selling and upcoming versions of the operating systems - yes it is outdated. For running your DNS server, browsing slashdot after adequate safeguards? No, only an idiot would call it outdated for that purpose.
Why useless? Just because something is defined as outdated by jbolden without even taking into account the purpose , doesn't mean anything as to the usefulness of using it. Which was my original point - it is mental masturbation having no impact on real life.
I know. Not precise enough to disagree with someone, but precise enough if there is agreement. There isn't now so this definition is not enough.
You're refusing to define outdated for any meaningful discussion to take place. Then you are assigning the quality of outdatedness as per your whims.
Either you'll have to let everyone decide what is or is not outdated, or define it precisely. I have defined it precisely as far as a purpose goes.
A user keeps a machine for a purpose, and not for the sake of keeping the machine. Any definition of "outdated" that doesn't define "outdated for what purpose?" is useless mental masturbation.
So if the Windows XP machine does its job, it is not outdated for its purpose. If an application runs currently, it is "current application" for the purpose of running. So the Windows XP machine runs "current applications".
It does not run some software being produced today. The machine is outdated for running those software. But running them is not the purpose, so the machine is not outdated for its purpose.
Feminism is the belief that women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men
No, it cannot possibly be. Because it implies men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women. So by that logic it can be renamed as masculism.
A thought experiment proves that no feminist would accept this renaming - even though it espouses the exact same idea. The ideas "women are just as capable and deserving of respect as men" and "men are just as capable and deserving of respect as women" ARE the exact same ideas.
It is mentioned clearly why they didn't include vim and emacs. One of the reasons is stupid (both of these have a steep learning curve), but the other and primary reason is sound. You don't need to switch however great the 5 tested editors turn out to be.
So Vim and emacs were declared winners before the race started. I see that you are not a fan of paralympics, but paralympics are somewhat entertaining and instructive.
Not sure what you mean. In case there is some confusion, in a lot of unofficial Oracle communication, "NT" means all Microsoft operating systems based on Windows NT. Some other old school software companies also use the word "NT" for this meaning even today.
So "NT" includes Microsoft server 2012 R2.
Actually the quote only really works with guns.
Or swords. Or online anonymity.
A is bullying B online. So A is already a criminal. Both A and B are anonymous. Anonymity gives A the advantage of being difficult to catch. Anonymity gives B the advantage that less details about B are available to A for bullying. In extreme situation, B can online regenerate i.e. remove the online identities that A is bullying and recreate other identities that A will not be able to find. Because of online anonymity, B has these extreme measures available.
Now outlaw online anonymity. A is a criminal, he will not think twice before using VPN / proxy / tor. Probably he is already physically abroad, making legislators of the victim B's country powerless in outlawing A's online anonymity. So A is still anonymous. B lost anonymity - so A now has more online information to bully B with.
Very similar to guns. Not sure why you don't see it.
There are a lot more books than books for entertainment. Idiots don't know this.
Doesn't matter whether it is good. Sometimes stopping something bad is worse - an example is alcohol and the worse effects of prohibition.
Alcohol gives nothing indispensible, and if alcoholic drinks were not invented, it arguably wouldn't have been an impediment to society. But once alcohol is invented, prohibition typically has an even worse effect.
Suppose alcoholic drinks were being invented today, one might ask whether it is a good invention, and arguably get a truthful answer in "no". But that answer doesn't matter. Similarly, information might not want to be free or want anything at all being inanimate, but technology is at such a stage where preventing copying entails unacceptable surveilance.
Xposed requires root. Why do so many more GNU/Linux devices than Android devices come with root? And how do I get a headphone jack fixed after I have voided the warranty by having installed a rooted ROM?
I don't understand how people use Android devices without root. Not even a firewall !!
Check the headphone jack before rooting. And don't break after it within a year - after which you'll have no warranty anyway for most devices.
By that standard, using software in GNU/Linux is not really looking beyond Novell because just as Wine is a free reimplementation of Windows API, GNU/Linux is a free reimplementation of UNIX.
That is ok because there is not much of a need to look beyond Novell. There is also something called open (relatively) specification, and a bigger something called target platform. GNU/Linux is great for software where GNU/Linux is the target platform. Wine is great for software where wine is the target platform - which isn't for much of software.
So this is a very bad example. Free reimplementation doesn't matter in looking beyond, but other aspects of Microsoft's and others' behaviour around the ecosystem matters. Brings me back ot my original point, this is similar to how Android sucks, but Cyanogenmod / AOSP / Xposed rock.
How should I "research" thoroughly if the product isn't even available for inspection in my geographic area?
Internet.
I currently run Xubuntu on my 10" laptop. But I use Intel for two reasons. One is that operating systems that ship on popular ARM devices tend to have window management policies that are all maximized all the time. The Android CDD explicitly has no provision for resizable windows
The great thing about Android is not Android itself - but the hacker community around it. The Xposed framework has utter disregard for the Android CDD - and supports 2 applications side by side. You might have to make sure it works for the specific device. Or rather, you might have to find a way to make it work for the specific device.
The other is that three applications that I use regularly are not ported to GNU/Linux (FamiTracker, Modplug Tracker, and FCEUX debugger version), and I run them through Wine. Or have I just painted myself into a "too niche for hardware makers to bother" corner?
This is a bigger problem. Using software in wine is not really looking beyond Microsoft.
How would one go about returning something that one finds unsuitable?
One wouldn't. Research, buy, take responsibility. The idiot mentality US has encouraged where sue-happy buyer has zero responsibility for even understanding the idea of the device he is buying is the reason for companies to not offer interesting things in the US - epecially in electronics.
Highly uninformative post as it doesn't mention this situation is only for NT. On UNIXes, port 1521 (or whatever port is selected in installer) is enough.
Oracle's emphasis is rarely on Microsoft's operating systems. Not only in RDBMS, but many other products support UNIXes primarily, and Microsoft's operating systems secondarily.
Right. So you need to look beyond Intel and Microsoft. Lenovo IdeaPad A10 - 10.1 inch, quad core cortex A9, Android, tiny charger, weighs a kilogram with charger. If you don't find it in the US, probably buy from China because the US is bought and paid for by Intel and Microsoft.