Such as Ritalin. Anything else wouldn't be worth the time you could have spent studying.
Seriously though, you're screwed education-wise. For the most part, if it isn't 100% about rote memorization, it's a vital part of passing exams.
The good news is that in the real world if you can't remember something off the top of your head and have to look it up, it's no big deal. The bad news is that the people who have good memory (and usually no other merits) will have a big advantage over you going into the job market.
If I have to choose between getting into a brawl with an old man and being shot by him, well let me roll up my sleeves...
Re:it's the monetary system stupid..
on
If I Had a Hammer
·
· Score: 1
But it's not communism, it's about as different from communism as capitalism. There's no reason people couldn't be free to vote for all the ruin they want.
Re:it's the monetary system stupid..
on
If I Had a Hammer
·
· Score: 1
That is a very interesting read, but spoil something for me: Is this going to turn into a bunch of religious hoo-ha? Because I'm getting hints of that as I approach the end of Chapter 1.
Re:it's the monetary system stupid..
on
If I Had a Hammer
·
· Score: 1
Well the first thing we do is repeal voting, because the system can't possibly work when people do whatever the fuck it is that they want to do.
[citation needed]
A society could transition from capitalism to...say, post-scarcity utopia (I'm not going to use the C word because it gets you all riled up, and it's not the best description anyway) smoothly through unconditional minimum income. Over time as the minimum income increases to the point where working for money moves from not-strictly-necessary to utterly pointless...surprise! Now you can do whatever you want, no need to dismantle democracy or anything.
If they like acting or reporting so much, and had enough resources that they didn't need to work, don't you think they'd take up acting or reporting as a hobby? Would it be that terrible to separate their passion from their paycheck?
Both are possibilities. Until the rich can rely on robotic labor they require everyone else to buy their products, that's why some rich people have been advocating decreasing income inequality recently - they know we're not too far from entering this destructive cycle and they don't have all the robot labor they need yet.
Nope sorry you'll have to take my word for it, or see if anyone else had the same problem. The change appeared on my Google Chat username only, not the name on my outgoing emails.
Do you think a bunch of people who don't have to spend most of their time awake grinding away on a meaningless job are going to get *less* or *more* politically aware?
Part of the reason we're kept so busy and cash-strapped is to make it harder for us to get involved in politics. I think your scenario is highly unlikely.
Re:I hate to point out the obvious but...
on
If I Had a Hammer
·
· Score: 1
I think such people are a minority and it may even be a cultural phenomenon - it's nothing that couldn't be solved with some therapy, or in a worst-case scenario a pointless work program for people who suffer this condition.
Let's assume their death toll is zero (until now I didn't know they'd sunk any ships other than their own). What would make them terrorists rather than vandals?
On the Gmail account I use on Slashdot, I had my nickname, which should be the only publicly visible name, set to "GameboyRMH." I couldn't leave the First Name and Last Name fields blank (they were separate back then) so I set them to "GameboyRMH" and "The Cool Guy."
Then one day last year my sister's giggling that I changed my username to "GameboyRMH The Cool Guy." WTF!? Turns out Google decided to expose what was in my real name fields to the public without my consent. At least my caution paid off.
"Global warming" was a technically correct term. So is "climate change," even if it's not as specific, and it's actually an older term than "global warming" but wasn't known outside of scientific circles. The public saw "global warming" first and then when they saw "climate change" they thought it was a cop out, since everywhere wasn't getting hotter and they don't understand how averages work.
A term that would be both technically correct and colloquially descriptive might be something like "climate energy increase." It doesn't give any false expectations to people who don't understand averages, yet it describes the problem and shouldn't sound like a good thing to people who live in cold areas far from the equator.
The only one of those that are proper eco-terrorists are the ALF. The others are just protest groups who occasionally commit petty crimes (they don't use violence). There are other real eco-terrorist groups out there like TAS.
Depends on who you ask. The Ayn-Randian-objectivist-anarcho-liberterian-conservative-capitalists, who have complete faith in the correctness of the free market even in the absence of government regulations, believe that the free market itself will solve this: eventually, corporations that don't monetize everything about you, will emerge and compete for the business of people who care about stuff like how their data is used. They will charge slightly higher prices to offset the profit they lose by not selling your data.
This has happened with phones. A small European company is producing the OpenPhoenux Neo900, a new phone for people who want control over their own devices.
The finished phone is projected to cost $800~1200USD...that's not "slightly" more expensive.
It'll go the same way as phones and tablets - to have personal control over a new device, you'll have to heavily modify it. The other option is to build your own from scratch.
Libertarians believe that as long as you are free to take the Unabomber option then you are free, and therefore there is no reason to regulate any of this.
Maybe like the alcohol industry, companies selling technologies that harvest your personal information should be forced to put a disclaimer on their ads along the lines of "please release your personal info responsibly." The borderline privacy-unaware masses might at least look into what the hell they're talking about.
Too bad I didn't say a *car* windshield, because my point was that it's not an occurrence an autonomous car would need to be able to handle. It could just hit the bird safely.
But then surely a condor, albatross or at least an ostrich could break a regular car's smaller sloped windshield, if you want to argue about birds and windshields instead of autonomous cars.
Slashdot Mirror
Such as Ritalin. Anything else wouldn't be worth the time you could have spent studying.
Seriously though, you're screwed education-wise. For the most part, if it isn't 100% about rote memorization, it's a vital part of passing exams.
The good news is that in the real world if you can't remember something off the top of your head and have to look it up, it's no big deal. The bad news is that the people who have good memory (and usually no other merits) will have a big advantage over you going into the job market.
s/Kingstown/Kingston/g
It's understandable that he could have got some confusing information from the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin incident.
40 is young to be dead.
See also: Nastiest parts of Kingstown, Jamaica; Somalia outside the government-controlled zone; Afghanistan.
If I have to choose between getting into a brawl with an old man and being shot by him, well let me roll up my sleeves...
But it's not communism, it's about as different from communism as capitalism. There's no reason people couldn't be free to vote for all the ruin they want.
That is a very interesting read, but spoil something for me: Is this going to turn into a bunch of religious hoo-ha? Because I'm getting hints of that as I approach the end of Chapter 1.
Well the first thing we do is repeal voting, because the system can't possibly work when people do whatever the fuck it is that they want to do.
[citation needed]
A society could transition from capitalism to...say, post-scarcity utopia (I'm not going to use the C word because it gets you all riled up, and it's not the best description anyway) smoothly through unconditional minimum income. Over time as the minimum income increases to the point where working for money moves from not-strictly-necessary to utterly pointless...surprise! Now you can do whatever you want, no need to dismantle democracy or anything.
The other results in mandatory behavior-altering spinal implants.
Why couldn't the utopia work without the "referee" feature? It wouldn't be a world devoid of crime but it would still work.
If they like acting or reporting so much, and had enough resources that they didn't need to work, don't you think they'd take up acting or reporting as a hobby? Would it be that terrible to separate their passion from their paycheck?
Both are possibilities. Until the rich can rely on robotic labor they require everyone else to buy their products, that's why some rich people have been advocating decreasing income inequality recently - they know we're not too far from entering this destructive cycle and they don't have all the robot labor they need yet.
Nope sorry you'll have to take my word for it, or see if anyone else had the same problem. The change appeared on my Google Chat username only, not the name on my outgoing emails.
Do you think a bunch of people who don't have to spend most of their time awake grinding away on a meaningless job are going to get *less* or *more* politically aware?
Part of the reason we're kept so busy and cash-strapped is to make it harder for us to get involved in politics. I think your scenario is highly unlikely.
I think such people are a minority and it may even be a cultural phenomenon - it's nothing that couldn't be solved with some therapy, or in a worst-case scenario a pointless work program for people who suffer this condition.
Let's assume their death toll is zero (until now I didn't know they'd sunk any ships other than their own). What would make them terrorists rather than vandals?
On the Gmail account I use on Slashdot, I had my nickname, which should be the only publicly visible name, set to "GameboyRMH." I couldn't leave the First Name and Last Name fields blank (they were separate back then) so I set them to "GameboyRMH" and "The Cool Guy."
Then one day last year my sister's giggling that I changed my username to "GameboyRMH The Cool Guy." WTF!? Turns out Google decided to expose what was in my real name fields to the public without my consent. At least my caution paid off.
"Global warming" was a technically correct term. So is "climate change," even if it's not as specific, and it's actually an older term than "global warming" but wasn't known outside of scientific circles. The public saw "global warming" first and then when they saw "climate change" they thought it was a cop out, since everywhere wasn't getting hotter and they don't understand how averages work.
A term that would be both technically correct and colloquially descriptive might be something like "climate energy increase." It doesn't give any false expectations to people who don't understand averages, yet it describes the problem and shouldn't sound like a good thing to people who live in cold areas far from the equator.
The only one of those that are proper eco-terrorists are the ALF. The others are just protest groups who occasionally commit petty crimes (they don't use violence). There are other real eco-terrorist groups out there like TAS.
They have a cellular connection, usually you even have to pay a subscription fee for it.
Depends on who you ask. The Ayn-Randian-objectivist-anarcho-liberterian-conservative-capitalists, who have complete faith in the correctness of the free market even in the absence of government regulations, believe that the free market itself will solve this: eventually, corporations that don't monetize everything about you, will emerge and compete for the business of people who care about stuff like how their data is used. They will charge slightly higher prices to offset the profit they lose by not selling your data.
This has happened with phones. A small European company is producing the OpenPhoenux Neo900, a new phone for people who want control over their own devices.
The finished phone is projected to cost $800~1200USD...that's not "slightly" more expensive.
It'll go the same way as phones and tablets - to have personal control over a new device, you'll have to heavily modify it. The other option is to build your own from scratch.
Libertarians believe that as long as you are free to take the Unabomber option then you are free, and therefore there is no reason to regulate any of this.
Maybe like the alcohol industry, companies selling technologies that harvest your personal information should be forced to put a disclaimer on their ads along the lines of "please release your personal info responsibly." The borderline privacy-unaware masses might at least look into what the hell they're talking about.
Too bad I didn't say a *car* windshield, because my point was that it's not an occurrence an autonomous car would need to be able to handle. It could just hit the bird safely.
But then surely a condor, albatross or at least an ostrich could break a regular car's smaller sloped windshield, if you want to argue about birds and windshields instead of autonomous cars.
Only a few other hellholes will search the data on your electronics though.