Hard work, misapplied, is useless, like a ditch-digger digging drainage where no drainage needs to go. Hard work is pretty important, but so is knowing what types of work will actually be of value, what types of work will be in high demand, and (most important) what types of work you're capable of accomplishing that few others will be able to do.
Biggest factors in what affects the amount of money you get in the salary world: How hard you can work. How replaceable you are. How rare what you can do is.
If robots take over production, there is no need for any UBI. Production costs would be so low that working only a few hours a month would be more than sufficient.
You might think that, but what we've seen over the last 30, 40 years is that productivity gains, automation savings, most of that goes to the ceos, the VPs, the shareholders, the investors. It lowers the prices of the companies' products, but most gains go to the very top, as they're the ones who control where those gains go to. For your scenario to happen, we would have to see that situation reverse, and I'm not sure that happens without some incredible sea change, violent or not.
There's still a lot of SF that is NOT tech, probably more than Santa Clara or Cupertino have. So there's still that. But they've been more and more getting pushed out of San Francisco as tech has causes living expenses to rise.
The Luddites were wrong because advances paved the way for more, different jobs. But what happens when that's not the case? What if the jobs are gone and there are no more jobs for someone of that skillset? What do you do then?
"Most times it doesn't need any human intervention at all"
Ah, the old "most times". That is the point there: "most times" it works. Except when it doesn't.
Yes, and the driver can get out and manually bring over the bin for the smaller number of cases if someone positioned the bins improperly, like behind a car. Utilities have found it's still a huge monetary savings to cut down on the number of workers.
The last 20% of anything is hard to do
Oh, absolutely. But they don't need to get 100% automation, 80% will do just fine for now. This doesn't involve eliminating humans from the equation entirely, it means smaller teams.
The only way to fix a stable person that WANTS to be homeless is to incarcerate them or kill them. Homeless drug addicts are the same, really. Force them into rehab, which is basically incarceration, and if they relapse they need to be removed
You can't. You can't incarcerate them. You can't incarcerate the mentally ill. We used to. We used to have mental institutions where people incapable of living in society because they're actually, well, crazy. But most of the institutions were shut down, in part due to REAL abuse (incarcerating and sterilizing 'stupid' people, homosexuals, even just people who buck the norms of society), but more than that, due to court decisions that ruled that unless people are a physical danger to others, they can't be locked up. So all the mentally ill were dumped onto the street, and the homeless problem has grown ever since.
As horrible as you think he is, he still beat Hillary. What does that say about her?
That the 2016 Presidential Election had the two worst candidates I've ever seen? I'll certainly give you that. Hillary was the lesser of two evils, but I don't blame anyone for refusing to vote for either.
San Francisco is not Silicon Valley, but there is a lot of overlap, much much more than there used to be. The Dot-Com bubble spread the tech world to SF, and since tech rebounded after the crash, San Francisco has been firmly part of that world.
The problem with a cult of personality is that it often doesn't just go away even when the founder dies. Hell, when Heaven's Gate had its mass suicide in 1997, they left two people behind to run their website and handle public relations. 21 years later and they're STILL believing adherents, still answering questions about the cult and keeping the website operational.
See, immediately modded as troll. No one can agree, and even questioning it triggers some people.
I'm pretty sure you've got a small group of followers who follow your posting history and spend their mod points modding down whatever you're talking about.
People that post on youtube *are* crazy. Crazy should be expected from them.
Some people are, sure. Plenty are not. But, you know, shock sells. Crazy folks can get a lot of hits because people point and say "haha, check out the crazy guy!"
We're spreading our copyright regime all over the world with TPP.
And I agree that the TPP is an atrocity that deserves to be relegated to the ashbin of history. However, the TPP and other agreements like this are voluntarily entered into by other countries. Those then become other countries' laws and are not specifically "American" laws. Indeed, they are pushed for by trans-national corporations who, while having a strong presence in the US, have a very strong presence in many countries and lobby for laws and agreements there.
The US has not recognized Europe's Right To Be Forgotten in US law, so US sites should not be required to censor US searches based on their laws anymore than Youtube should be -required- to censor videos that don't fit Saudi Arabia's standards of female dress just because they passed a law requiring it.
There is some irony here with the poster arguing for making it easier to find out information about people posting as anon. Why don't you lead by example, you silly twat?
He's not arguing for David Brin's Transparent Society. He's arguing that public records should be legally searchable. That has nothing to do with what details he voluntarily made public.
Really, it's historical revisionism... in reality, if the crime was truly unimportant, he wouldn't be judged that harshly for it in the first place...
But what usual happens is if you have a criminal conviction, serious or trivial, your resume gets dropped without being read through or the details of that conviction being given, because there are plenty of people filing resumes for just about any job who DON'T have a criminal conviction on record. A criminal record of any type becomes a very easy first cut, a way to whittle down the list of applicants.
The trolls have lots of mod points and get vindictive these days. You just have to shrug, ignore the mod totals you get (because they don't mean shit), and move on.
Slashdot Mirror
Since Day 1, when the US Government made itself responsible for international trade with the USA?
LOTS of people work hard.
Hard work, misapplied, is useless, like a ditch-digger digging drainage where no drainage needs to go. Hard work is pretty important, but so is knowing what types of work will actually be of value, what types of work will be in high demand, and (most important) what types of work you're capable of accomplishing that few others will be able to do.
Biggest factors in what affects the amount of money you get in the salary world:
How hard you can work.
How replaceable you are.
How rare what you can do is.
If robots take over production, there is no need for any UBI. Production costs would be so low that working only a few hours a month would be more than sufficient.
You might think that, but what we've seen over the last 30, 40 years is that productivity gains, automation savings, most of that goes to the ceos, the VPs, the shareholders, the investors. It lowers the prices of the companies' products, but most gains go to the very top, as they're the ones who control where those gains go to. For your scenario to happen, we would have to see that situation reverse, and I'm not sure that happens without some incredible sea change, violent or not.
There's still a lot of SF that is NOT tech, probably more than Santa Clara or Cupertino have. So there's still that.
But they've been more and more getting pushed out of San Francisco as tech has causes living expenses to rise.
The Luddites were wrong because advances paved the way for more, different jobs.
But what happens when that's not the case? What if the jobs are gone and there are no more jobs for someone of that skillset? What do you do then?
"Most times it doesn't need any human intervention at all"
Ah, the old "most times". That is the point there: "most times" it works. Except when it doesn't.
Yes, and the driver can get out and manually bring over the bin for the smaller number of cases if someone positioned the bins improperly, like behind a car. Utilities have found it's still a huge monetary savings to cut down on the number of workers.
The last 20% of anything is hard to do
Oh, absolutely. But they don't need to get 100% automation, 80% will do just fine for now. This doesn't involve eliminating humans from the equation entirely, it means smaller teams.
The only way to fix a stable person that WANTS to be homeless is to incarcerate them or kill them. Homeless drug addicts are the same, really. Force them into rehab, which is basically incarceration, and if they relapse they need to be removed
You can't. You can't incarcerate them. You can't incarcerate the mentally ill.
We used to. We used to have mental institutions where people incapable of living in society because they're actually, well, crazy. But most of the institutions were shut down, in part due to REAL abuse (incarcerating and sterilizing 'stupid' people, homosexuals, even just people who buck the norms of society), but more than that, due to court decisions that ruled that unless people are a physical danger to others, they can't be locked up. So all the mentally ill were dumped onto the street, and the homeless problem has grown ever since.
As horrible as you think he is, he still beat Hillary. What does that say about her?
That the 2016 Presidential Election had the two worst candidates I've ever seen? I'll certainly give you that. Hillary was the lesser of two evils, but I don't blame anyone for refusing to vote for either.
This isn't some mindless entity that is trying to push its evil views on the country, it is a representative of the people that value their 2A rights.
The NRA opposes ANY gun controls, even those supported by the majority of Americans.
San Francisco is not Silicon Valley, but there is a lot of overlap, much much more than there used to be. The Dot-Com bubble spread the tech world to SF, and since tech rebounded after the crash, San Francisco has been firmly part of that world.
The problem with a cult of personality is that it often doesn't just go away even when the founder dies.
Hell, when Heaven's Gate had its mass suicide in 1997, they left two people behind to run their website and handle public relations. 21 years later and they're STILL believing adherents, still answering questions about the cult and keeping the website operational.
I read the summaries for the topic/headline, I read Slashdot comments to figure out what's really going on.
See, immediately modded as troll. No one can agree, and even questioning it triggers some people.
I'm pretty sure you've got a small group of followers who follow your posting history and spend their mod points modding down whatever you're talking about.
People that post on youtube *are* crazy. Crazy should be expected from them.
Some people are, sure. Plenty are not. But, you know, shock sells. Crazy folks can get a lot of hits because people point and say "haha, check out the crazy guy!"
I search for Youtube Shooter on google.com and news.google.com and I get plenty of results. Are they "suppressing" search results?
The US is a chief "offender" here.
We're spreading our copyright regime all over the world with TPP.
And I agree that the TPP is an atrocity that deserves to be relegated to the ashbin of history. However, the TPP and other agreements like this are voluntarily entered into by other countries. Those then become other countries' laws and are not specifically "American" laws. Indeed, they are pushed for by trans-national corporations who, while having a strong presence in the US, have a very strong presence in many countries and lobby for laws and agreements there.
The US has not recognized Europe's Right To Be Forgotten in US law, so US sites should not be required to censor US searches based on their laws anymore than Youtube should be -required- to censor videos that don't fit Saudi Arabia's standards of female dress just because they passed a law requiring it.
There is some irony here with the poster arguing for making it easier to find out information about people posting as anon. Why don't you lead by example, you silly twat?
He's not arguing for David Brin's Transparent Society. He's arguing that public records should be legally searchable. That has nothing to do with what details he voluntarily made public.
Really, it's historical revisionism... in reality, if the crime was truly unimportant, he wouldn't be judged that harshly for it in the first place...
But what usual happens is if you have a criminal conviction, serious or trivial, your resume gets dropped without being read through or the details of that conviction being given, because there are plenty of people filing resumes for just about any job who DON'T have a criminal conviction on record. A criminal record of any type becomes a very easy first cut, a way to whittle down the list of applicants.
Still trying to understand why this is on slashdot. News for financial wonks?
The TPP comes with plenty of technology-related changes as well, especially in the realm of copyright law and copyright protection.
ignore the mod totals you get because they don't mean shit
Just like all of your comments.
Hey, what goes around, comes around!
Case in point! Oh well.
I'll admit that was one Family Guy's better, more self-aware non-sequiturs.
The trolls have lots of mod points and get vindictive these days. You just have to shrug, ignore the mod totals you get (because they don't mean shit), and move on.
The parents are the parents. It is naturally their call, not the teachers'.
Speaking of false flags...
Awww, I noticed you got a little butthurt and decided to stalk me.
That's so sweet, APK is the only other person who stalked me before!