Well, they have to interface with the optic nerve. I'm pulling this from half-remembered biology lectures, but IIRC nobody is actually sure if the optic nerve can handle a broader spectrum input. It might work, it might compress the new expanded spectrum into the common perceived one, or it might just flip out and overload. We don't know.
Why would the optic nerve need to handle the broader spectrum? You could easily do the "nomalization" in software before sending it to the optic nerve and even have the software autoswitch to "night vision" when ambient light gets low.
Traveling doesn't require much intelligence, basically it's just walking unless one happens to end up floating on a piece of wood. It's more about hunger.
Crossing an ocean, crossing a mountain, and surviving in the cold all require either intelligence or proper physical attributes. Chimps, although highly intelligent, still aren't intelligent enough to cross a mountain and survive in the cold even though they have the advantage of fur and put 1000 chimps on an island without food and it doesn't matter how hungry they get, they are not getting off that island.
Groups probably were naturally isolated for long periods of time by geography and as intelligence increased so did the ability to travel more and go into other enviroments. Once we became a "global" population all similiar species were eventually assimilated.
They do take saliva, just not all the time. DNA wasn't mentioned in the article. The contractor part is probably the biggest issue.
I think another big issue is the money. $7.9M might be change for the federal government but that's still a crapload of money. What is the purpose of the study and even if you needed a little bit of data wouldn't a small crew driving around for a few months give you the general idea for a fraction of the cost? I think big government starts to lose sight of reality when they drop a few million here and a few million there where if they were really concerned about money could easily get it done for a fraction of the cost.
I think it depends on what you're interested in. Most of the other sites I follow like newscientist.com and machineslikeus.com although they have tech stuff also have alot more medical stuff. Google news also has a tech section. I like slashdot. It's about as good as any for my interests and honestly advertisement or not this article seems to fit the "news for nerds" if for no other reason that I find it interesting that someone is selling an $80 app where the average price is probably closer to $2.
Yeah, that's great, but look at the real world. Where the government runs healthcare (UK, Canada etc) it's cheaper and more efficient.
But hey, don't let observable facts get in the way of your reasons.
Apparently you've never talked to the people in those countries who hate their systems and their taxes or noticed how the people there who can afford it still come to the US for many treatments.
Private industry is more efficient than government.
Yeah. It keeps healthcare costs down in the US and it worked brilliantly for UK rail services. And everyone benefits? Investors are not going to punt money in to something because they want to support the building of an efficient operation that'll benefit everyone. Most investors are looking for returns,
We have runaway healthcare costs because of government involvement not because of private industry. If the majority of people actually paid their own medical bills you would see medical bill prices dropping the same way lasik, dentistry, and plastic surgery prices continue to fall. Doctors couldn't stay in business if people had to pay cash at their current prices but instead of lowering their prices to something reasonable prices continue to skyrocket because of upside down incentives put in place by the government. I never said that investors wanted to build an efficient operation but industries with healthy competition force them to to be able to compete that's why lasik continues to become safer and cheaper while in the medical world ruled by government incentives and subsidized healthcare you can't even get a medical doctor to quote you a price.
Yeah, I thought about that when I posted. There are alot of capital intensive or otherwise unusual industry that wouldn't fit a typical mold not to mention as yet unthought of industries but it was ment as one possible way of how to get rid of the idiotic "too big to fail" mentality. Southwestern Bell deployed a slightly different strategy for the same purpose. I had a friend that used to work there and every year they would give a "vital to the company" bonus to the most irreplacable employees. These bonuses were large (I think his was almost 1 year salary) but were given on the condition that you train a second person to do your job in case something happened to you. I wouldn't be opposed to the government implementing something like this especially in areas where there is a single supplier of critical components that are needed to maintain our technological house of cards.
Private industry is more efficient than government.
I take it you've never experienced the joys of private water/sewer service. Locally, in Snohomish County the people have the choice between the Snohomish County Public Utility District or Puget Sound Energy for electricity. Because of the necessity of feeding as much profit as possible into shareholder dividends and executive salaries PSE's electrical service is more expensive, less reliable, and the equipment and lines are poorly maintained. For some odd reason, when given a choice almost everyone prefers to get their electricity from SnoPUD instead of PSE.
Although I think it makes perfect sense to privatize USPS and alot of other government agencies, I do not think water/sewer should be privatized and doing so is bad for everyone and makes no sense. USPS, UPS, FedEx can all compete because they all are able to use the same common infrastructure. The only way to do this with "water/sewer" would be to still have the government maintain the main water lines or to lay multiple mainlines down every street so that each house has the option to tap each line. As you stated above with people prefering SnoPUD, that's how it is suppose to work. People should move to the provider they prefer and the shoddy one should eventually die off. That unfortunately doesn't happen if there is a defacto monopoly because one person owns the infrastructure so you can't fairly compare the private water/sewer to private postal service.
Forcing people to compete by breaking them up is even more sadistic than simply making it hard for them to cooperate. When will this religion end?
So what do you suggest? You're the one who was complaining about private industry. Private industry is more efficient than government. Most complaints I hear about the evils of capitalism are complaints about very large fortune 500 companies. I was trying to give one possible solution that could be the best of both worlds. Privatizing the USPS just makes sense not so someone can make a profit but so everyone benefits from an efficient operation.
The too big to fail mentality was invented by the government and corporations. Let them fail. I can name at least a dozen car manufacturers that no longer exists and we are probably better for it. If you're worried about a company being too big to fail, split it apart or set a maximum size of a company. The splitting up of the telephone company was probably one of the better moves that the government did but unfortunately they have basically merged back together. Setting a maximum size would prevent that from happening. Something like if gross revenue exceeds $1B then all profits are taxed at 95%. Companies would immediately split themselves up. I think one of the problems is these big corporate or government entities lose sight of reality and the average joe can't compete with someone who has the strength of 10 million men but more government is not the solution. The solution is to reduce the power of the government AND the power of the corporation so that a reasonable size group of people (say 10k activists) actually have a fighting chance.
"Both are currently weak and can only get better. "
I'm sold! Take my money now!
What money? The examples I mentioned are free and will likely remain free so microsoft's high-end projects are having to compete with both "free" and "good enough"
Putting all your eggs in the Office camp seems very dangerous. Our office recently migrated to openoffice and never looked back. I use google docs at home. Both are currently weak and can only get better. Google has recently added office tools to android. I see standalone high dollar office suites as a dying breed. I personally would not double down on them. Same with high-end computer OSes, another one of Microsoft's cash cows. If microsoft wants to exist in 20 years they need to be in the tablet, smartphone, tv console, and other growing markets that continue to reduce the need for a full blown desktop at home. I know a lot of people who no longer have a desktop computer or see no need for one. This number will probably continue to grow as tablets/smartphones and roku/xbox type devices continue to add features.
I think the problem is the way they get their money. Instead of charging service fees that reflect their cost of business, some fees are set exorbitantly over the cost of providing the service (like a $20 service fee anytime "overdraft protection" is used). And these fees are paid by those that can least afford them. The guy that keeps $10,000 in his account gets free checking, and never gets dinged by overdraft fees. But he's being used by the bank too, by getting 0% interest on his checking account so it becomes a free loan to the bank.
No, you need to go one step deeper all the way back to you the consumer. Banks provide a service. They could charge a person $20/month for this service and probably be ok financially if they could get customers but you the consumer will go to the bank across the street that gives free checking instead. You pay for free checking with overdraft fees and lost interest just like you pay for free broadcast tv with commercials. They aren't being "used" by the bank. They are paying the bank to use their services and most people would rather lose a little interest or have the occasional fee than have a reoccuring monthly fee. I understand exactly how a bank charges me and I have no problems with it. If you don't like their business model, find a bank, credit union, etc... that has a business model and fee structure you like.
Yes, they have a shell but they don't fly and they don't move while a ball and more to the point are nothing like the robot in a cage that this article references. The robot in this article is more akin to a bumper car than any insect I've ever seen.
Don't be so smug. Crimes like these have a reverse survivorship bias. You usually only hear about the ones that get caught or at least leave evidence behind.
When I read "insect like robot" I don't expect it to be the size of a basketball. Thankfully, insects aren't that big where I live.
Relative size isn't as important to be insect-like. Aliens from movies like Stormship Troopers are definitely insect-like but I don't consider a robot encased in a round cage to avoid damage as anywhere close to "avoid damage like an insect". I've never seen an insect with a protective round cage. I'm pretty sure they have other ways of minimizing damage.
Exactly. Nobody I know ever uses it for anything *but* that.
Especially in certain parts of the IT industry. Keeping track of the ridiculous number of people you work with is impossible. Having a nice list - even if it spams your inbox with recruitment crap while you're not actively seeking employment opportunities - is a damned handy thing to have if you find yourself in a position to actually need to look for a job.
I'm not for sure why any employer or anyone else trusts or cares about linkedin especially in the IT field. Most of the people on my linkedin profile who have vouched for my computer knowledge know nothing about computers. They've said I'm an expert at java, php, and any other language that linkedin suggests even if I know absolutely nothing about said language. To them it's all the same and it makes my linkedin profile utterly useless as I'm ranked higher in languages I don't know than I am in languages I actually do.
IANAL, but "rent-to-own" seldom really functions as a rental; it's effectively an installment sales contract in which you pay more interest than your state allows on real installment loans, in return for having walk-away rights.
Although this is their target market, the "rent-to-own" purchases by the payday cash loan crowd, no sane people should ever use them to actually buy something as the price is usually double or more before you're finished. Using them as a rental is actually fairly reasonable though if you need furniture for a month or a big TV for a superbowl party.
In short, this isn't a "violation of the 4th amendment" so much as it is an excuse to try and get access to the guy's hard drive and recover stolen assets.
What do you think a "violation of the 4th amendment" is then? To me "an excuse to bypass the 4th amendment to gain X" is exactly that. It is a violation and an attempt to bypass the 4th amendment. Whether he is guilty is not the point. Now if they got a proper warrant and executed it correctly, that's a different story but if they are using an excuse to bypass proper protocol then it very much is a violation of the 4th amendment. It doesn't really matter what the excuse is either.
Define "average person". I walk a lot compared to an average western person. I try to knock over a couple of kilometres a day, which might not sound like much, but compared to your average lazy westerner whose only walking is from the bedroom to the garage, it is above average. I can walk about 5kms at about 5km/h without thinking about it, but more than that and I feel it. And I do this almost every day. If I do a 10km walk I need a rest and don't feel much like repeating it the next day. 35miles (60km) in one day would kill me. I work in a company of 2000 people and looking around I would bet my house that at least half of them couldn't walk 5km a day for one week. 60 km a day would pose a huge problem for most western people.
I would consider myself fairly "average" by your definition. I sit at a desk all day and work from home so I don't even have to walk to the garage. I could probably afford to lose 15 pounds but I still have no problem on vacation going to the zoo, six flags, disney world, etc... and walking for 8-10 hours straight at probably around 5km/h with no issues for an entire week. So I'm guessing that I get close to the 35mi/60km per day where generally on a typical day I'm probably lucky to hit 3000steps/2km in a day. At least for me, walking indefinitely even when I don't do it regularly doesn't seem to be an issue and would presumably get easier over time.
The good news is that, once we're off this planet, most of those grand old sociopathic power dreams become impossible. There'll never be a Galactic Empire, because you can't boss people around when your orders take thousands of years to reach them. There will probably never even be a Solar Empire, because the odds are high that your 'private army' can't travel at more than 10% of the speed of light, and the Oort Cloud is far enough away for even that to be very hard to control.
There is an inverse to this too though. Once the average person can travel the galaxy with ease there is no way to stop someone from capturing and enslaving people on their private ships or planets and doing all sorts of inhumane things. Pirates and mercenaries would permanently come back, people could disappear forever, blowing up or even threatening to blow up a planet would become a viable option and a host of other very negative things as with access to a single ship you could go your own way and write your own rules without consequences from anyone.
You do hear mention of hitler killing undesirables on occasion but generally people are fixated on the jews because that is one of the largest true genocides we've ever experienced where someone is being killing just for their race. Most of the other mass exterminations are people exterminated their opponents not solely a race.
And a good horse rider with multiple horses can do a lot better than that. For example, Commanche and Mongol riders could easily do 75 to 100 miles a day by this means.
Again, you've changed the criteria to multiple horses. A peasant would be unlikely to have access to a single horse let alone have access to multiple horses along a route. Most likely during this time though period people would rarely travel further than the closest village and only traders would travel to the next village probably with a donkey or two. Even today most people rarely travel further than the closest town to do business except on special occasions.
Oh, and reading over that article about Karl Meltzer, it says on the 40th day he ran over 100 miles. I'm not sure a horse is even capable of 100 miles in a single day where here is a person who did this after running over 2000 miles in the previous 39 days.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they have to interface with the optic nerve. I'm pulling this from half-remembered biology lectures, but IIRC nobody is actually sure if the optic nerve can handle a broader spectrum input. It might work, it might compress the new expanded spectrum into the common perceived one, or it might just flip out and overload. We don't know.
Why would the optic nerve need to handle the broader spectrum? You could easily do the "nomalization" in software before
sending it to the optic nerve and even have the software autoswitch to "night vision" when ambient light gets low.
Traveling doesn't require much intelligence, basically it's just walking unless one happens to end up floating on a piece of wood. It's more about hunger.
Crossing an ocean, crossing a mountain, and surviving in the cold all require either intelligence or proper physical attributes.
Chimps, although highly intelligent, still aren't intelligent enough to cross a mountain and survive in the cold even though they
have the advantage of fur and put 1000 chimps on an island without food and it doesn't matter how hungry they get, they are
not getting off that island.
Groups probably were naturally isolated for long periods of time by geography and as intelligence increased so did the
ability to travel more and go into other enviroments. Once we became a "global" population all similiar species were
eventually assimilated.
They do take saliva, just not all the time. DNA wasn't mentioned in the article. The contractor part is probably the biggest issue.
I think another big issue is the money. $7.9M might be change for the federal government but that's still a crapload of money.
What is the purpose of the study and even if you needed a little bit of data wouldn't a small crew driving around for a few
months give you the general idea for a fraction of the cost? I think big government starts to lose sight of reality when they drop
a few million here and a few million there where if they were really concerned about money could easily get it done for a
fraction of the cost.
I think it depends on what you're interested in. Most of the other sites I follow like newscientist.com and
machineslikeus.com although they have tech stuff also have alot more medical stuff. Google news also
has a tech section. I like slashdot. It's about as good as any for my interests and honestly advertisement
or not this article seems to fit the "news for nerds" if for no other reason that I find it interesting that
someone is selling an $80 app where the average price is probably closer to $2.
Yeah, that's great, but look at the real world. Where the government runs healthcare (UK, Canada etc) it's cheaper and more efficient.
But hey, don't let observable facts get in the way of your reasons.
Apparently you've never talked to the people in those countries who hate their systems
and their taxes or noticed how the people there who can afford it still come to the US for
many treatments.
Private industry is more efficient than government.
Yeah. It keeps healthcare costs down in the US and it worked brilliantly for UK rail services. And everyone benefits? Investors are not going to punt money in to something because they want to support the building of an efficient operation that'll benefit everyone. Most investors are looking for returns,
We have runaway healthcare costs because of government involvement not because of private industry. If the majority of people actually paid
their own medical bills you would see medical bill prices dropping the same way lasik, dentistry, and plastic surgery prices continue to fall.
Doctors couldn't stay in business if people had to pay cash at their current prices but instead of lowering their prices to something reasonable
prices continue to skyrocket because of upside down incentives put in place by the government.
I never said that investors wanted to build an efficient operation but industries with healthy competition force them to to be able to compete
that's why lasik continues to become safer and cheaper while in the medical world ruled by government incentives and subsidized healthcare
you can't even get a medical doctor to quote you a price.
Yeah, I thought about that when I posted. There are alot of capital intensive or otherwise unusual industry that wouldn't fit
a typical mold not to mention as yet unthought of industries but it was ment as one possible way of how to get rid of the idiotic
"too big to fail" mentality. Southwestern Bell deployed a slightly different strategy for the same purpose. I had a friend that
used to work there and every year they would give a "vital to the company" bonus to the most irreplacable employees. These
bonuses were large (I think his was almost 1 year salary) but were given on the condition that you train a second person to
do your job in case something happened to you. I wouldn't be opposed to the government implementing something like this
especially in areas where there is a single supplier of critical components that are needed to maintain our technological house
of cards.
Private industry is more efficient than government.
I take it you've never experienced the joys of private water/sewer service. Locally, in Snohomish County the people have the choice between the Snohomish County Public Utility District or Puget Sound Energy for electricity. Because of the necessity of feeding as much profit as possible into shareholder dividends and executive salaries PSE's electrical service is more expensive, less reliable, and the equipment and lines are poorly maintained. For some odd reason, when given a choice almost everyone prefers to get their electricity from SnoPUD instead of PSE.
Although I think it makes perfect sense to privatize USPS and alot of other government agencies, I do not think water/sewer should be
privatized and doing so is bad for everyone and makes no sense. USPS, UPS, FedEx can all compete because they all are able to use
the same common infrastructure. The only way to do this with "water/sewer" would be to still have the government maintain the main
water lines or to lay multiple mainlines down every street so that each house has the option to tap each line. As you stated above with
people prefering SnoPUD, that's how it is suppose to work. People should move to the provider they prefer and the shoddy one should
eventually die off. That unfortunately doesn't happen if there is a defacto monopoly because one person owns the infrastructure so you
can't fairly compare the private water/sewer to private postal service.
Forcing people to compete by breaking them up is even more sadistic than simply making it hard for them to cooperate. When will this religion end?
So what do you suggest? You're the one who was complaining about private industry. Private industry is
more efficient than government. Most complaints I hear about the evils of capitalism are complaints about
very large fortune 500 companies. I was trying to give one possible solution that could be the best of both
worlds. Privatizing the USPS just makes sense not so someone can make a profit but so everyone benefits
from an efficient operation.
The too big to fail mentality was invented by the government and corporations. Let them fail. I can name at least a dozen car manufacturers
that no longer exists and we are probably better for it. If you're worried about a company being too big to fail, split it apart or set a maximum
size of a company. The splitting up of the telephone company was probably one of the better moves that the government did but unfortunately
they have basically merged back together. Setting a maximum size would prevent that from happening. Something like if gross revenue
exceeds $1B then all profits are taxed at 95%. Companies would immediately split themselves up. I think one of the problems is these big
corporate or government entities lose sight of reality and the average joe can't compete with someone who has the strength of 10 million men
but more government is not the solution. The solution is to reduce the power of the government AND the power of the corporation so that a
reasonable size group of people (say 10k activists) actually have a fighting chance.
"Both are currently weak and can only get better. "
I'm sold! Take my money now!
What money? The examples I mentioned are free and will likely remain free so
microsoft's high-end projects are having to compete with both "free" and "good enough"
Putting all your eggs in the Office camp seems very dangerous. Our office recently
migrated to openoffice and never looked back. I use google docs at home. Both
are currently weak and can only get better. Google has recently added office tools
to android. I see standalone high dollar office suites as a dying breed. I personally
would not double down on them. Same with high-end computer OSes, another one
of Microsoft's cash cows. If microsoft wants to exist in 20 years they need to be in
the tablet, smartphone, tv console, and other growing markets that continue to reduce
the need for a full blown desktop at home. I know a lot of people who no longer have
a desktop computer or see no need for one. This number will probably continue to
grow as tablets/smartphones and roku/xbox type devices continue to add features.
I think the problem is the way they get their money. Instead of charging service fees that reflect their cost of business, some fees are set exorbitantly over the cost of providing the service (like a $20 service fee anytime "overdraft protection" is used). And these fees are paid by those that can least afford them. The guy that keeps $10,000 in his account gets free checking, and never gets dinged by overdraft fees. But he's being used by the bank too, by getting 0% interest on his checking account so it becomes a free loan to the bank.
No, you need to go one step deeper all the way back to you the consumer. Banks provide a service. They could charge a person $20/month
for this service and probably be ok financially if they could get customers but you the consumer will go to the bank across the street that
gives free checking instead. You pay for free checking with overdraft fees and lost interest just like you pay for free broadcast tv with commercials.
They aren't being "used" by the bank. They are paying the bank to use their services and most people would rather lose a little interest or have the
occasional fee than have a reoccuring monthly fee. I understand exactly how a bank charges me and I have no problems with it.
If you don't like their business model, find a bank, credit union, etc... that has a business model and fee structure you like.
I've never seen an insect with a protective round cage.
Armadillidiidae, just saying.
Yes, they have a shell but they don't fly and they don't move while a ball and more to the point
are nothing like the robot in a cage that this article references. The robot in this article is more
akin to a bumper car than any insect I've ever seen.
And how did that work out for him?
Don't be so smug. Crimes like these have a reverse survivorship bias. You usually
only hear about the ones that get caught or at least leave evidence behind.
When I read "insect like robot" I don't expect it to be the size of a basketball. Thankfully, insects aren't that big where I live.
Relative size isn't as important to be insect-like. Aliens from movies like Stormship Troopers are definitely insect-like but I
don't consider a robot encased in a round cage to avoid damage as anywhere close to "avoid damage like an insect".
I've never seen an insect with a protective round cage. I'm pretty sure they have other ways of minimizing damage.
Exactly. Nobody I know ever uses it for anything *but* that.
Especially in certain parts of the IT industry. Keeping track of the ridiculous number of people you work with is impossible. Having a nice list - even if it spams your inbox with recruitment crap while you're not actively seeking employment opportunities - is a damned handy thing to have if you find yourself in a position to actually need to look for a job.
I'm not for sure why any employer or anyone else trusts or cares about linkedin especially in the IT field.
Most of the people on my linkedin profile who have vouched for my computer knowledge know nothing about
computers. They've said I'm an expert at java, php, and any other language that linkedin suggests even
if I know absolutely nothing about said language. To them it's all the same and it makes my linkedin profile
utterly useless as I'm ranked higher in languages I don't know than I am in languages I actually do.
IANAL, but "rent-to-own" seldom really functions as a rental; it's effectively an installment sales contract in which you pay more interest than your state allows on real installment loans, in return for having walk-away rights.
Although this is their target market, the "rent-to-own" purchases by the payday cash loan crowd, no sane people should
ever use them to actually buy something as the price is usually double or more before you're finished.
Using them as a rental is actually fairly reasonable though if you need furniture for a month or a big TV for a superbowl party.
In short, this isn't a "violation of the 4th amendment" so much as it is an excuse to try and get access to the guy's hard drive and recover stolen assets.
What do you think a "violation of the 4th amendment" is then? To me "an excuse to bypass the 4th amendment to gain X" is
exactly that. It is a violation and an attempt to bypass the 4th amendment. Whether he is guilty is not the point.
Now if they got a proper warrant and executed it correctly, that's a different story but if they are using an excuse to bypass
proper protocol then it very much is a violation of the 4th amendment. It doesn't really matter what the excuse is either.
Define "average person". I walk a lot compared to an average western person. I try to knock over a couple of kilometres a day, which might not sound like much, but compared to your average lazy westerner whose only walking is from the bedroom to the garage, it is above average.
I can walk about 5kms at about 5km/h without thinking about it, but more than that and I feel it. And I do this almost every day. If I do a 10km walk I need a rest and don't feel much like repeating it the next day. 35miles (60km) in one day would kill me.
I work in a company of 2000 people and looking around I would bet my house that at least half of them couldn't walk 5km a day for one week. 60 km a day would pose a huge problem for most western people.
I would consider myself fairly "average" by your definition. I sit at a desk all day and work from home so I don't even have
to walk to the garage. I could probably afford to lose 15 pounds but I still have no problem on vacation going to the zoo,
six flags, disney world, etc... and walking for 8-10 hours straight at probably around 5km/h with no issues for an entire week.
So I'm guessing that I get close to the 35mi/60km per day where generally on a typical day I'm probably lucky to hit
3000steps/2km in a day. At least for me, walking indefinitely even when I don't do it regularly doesn't seem to be an issue
and would presumably get easier over time.
The good news is that, once we're off this planet, most of those grand old sociopathic power dreams become impossible. There'll never be a Galactic Empire, because you can't boss people around when your orders take thousands of years to reach them. There will probably never even be a Solar Empire, because the odds are high that your 'private army' can't travel at more than 10% of the speed of light, and the Oort Cloud is far enough away for even that to be very hard to control.
There is an inverse to this too though. Once the average person can travel the galaxy with ease there is no way to stop someone from
capturing and enslaving people on their private ships or planets and doing all sorts of inhumane things. Pirates and mercenaries would
permanently come back, people could disappear forever, blowing up or even threatening to blow up a planet would become a viable
option and a host of other very negative things as with access to a single ship you could go your own way and write your own rules
without consequences from anyone.
And why is it you only hear about the Jews hmmm?
You do hear mention of hitler killing undesirables on occasion but generally people
are fixated on the jews because that is one of the largest true genocides we've ever
experienced where someone is being killing just for their race. Most of the other
mass exterminations are people exterminated their opponents not solely a race.
And a good horse rider with multiple horses can do a lot better than that. For example, Commanche and Mongol riders could easily do 75 to 100 miles a day by this means.
Again, you've changed the criteria to multiple horses. A peasant would be unlikely to have access to a single horse let alone have access to
multiple horses along a route. Most likely during this time though period people would rarely travel further than the closest village and only
traders would travel to the next village probably with a donkey or two. Even today most people rarely travel further than the closest town to
do business except on special occasions.
Oh, and reading over that article about Karl Meltzer, it says on the 40th day he ran over 100 miles.
I'm not sure a horse is even capable of 100 miles in a single day where here is a person who
did this after running over 2000 miles in the previous 39 days.