How does that work anyway? It seems like malware but it's got to be pretty sophisticated to post in other users' names on Slashdot and it doesn't seem worth it for a human to make new accounts just to post that crap. Either the payoff is far higher than I imagine, it's actually a test for something else (astroturfing?) or mycleanpc lost a shitload of money for a tiny bit of SEO.
In any case I dearly hope Slashdot doesn't turn to captchas to prevent that type of post.
I most certainly do NOT want anyone else defining and banning "trolls". It's a very short trip from mods deciding who a troll is to mods censoring speech they don't like. I've seen that trip taken on many forums.
Only a very short list of very obviously unacceptable behavior needs to be banned: illegal material, obvious spam, and frequently repeated copypasta. There are many things I would rather not read from frosty piss to Obama's duke to grits but it's well worth reading those to be sure my own speech is free and the opinions I read are organically derived.
I agree that this would be a very cost effective and simple way to administer the program, ideal in every way. Furthermore since a tax cut (even an unearned âoeearned incomeâ tax credit) is politically much more viable.
Everyone likes the words âoetax breakâ.
Republicans have been standing behind âoetax cutsâ that amount to giving money to companies for a long time and it would be VERY exploitable to see Republican leaders try to argue against this "tax cut".
I feel health care is outside the appropriate scope of this conversation, so I won't address your comments on that matter.
As user sillybilly pointed out your numbers for doubling the UBI provision are off by a factor of ten. But you're underestimating the amount that can be wrung from other programs. Corporate tax cuts amount to a trillion dollars of spending. I'm not arguing that this is free money. Eliminating these cuts will have a profound and negative effect on the economy if they're not replaced with explicit measures elsewhere. Companies will stop research the tax cuts incentivise, many will try to move overseas, With all the dirty money in US politics it will be difficult to eliminate the cuts anyway. On the other hand a new law that directly eliminates the less helpful corporate tax breaks and move any incentives to a direct and openly debated form would not only help take corporate money out of politics but raise half a trillion dollars a year.
Furthermore a huge amount of the US budget and state budgets amount to welfare in the form of jobs programs. We're making hundreds of billions of dollars of unneeded military equipment to save jobs. Our military is overmanned to help keep unemployment low. We allow many governmental departments to become bloated just to keep offering those jobs. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Look in any political speech and you'll find that word. What's needed is a complete change of focus. The aim isn't to keep people active, it's to keep them fed, clothed, and mentally healthy. Eliminate every jobs program. That alone will cut the military by 1/3, speed the functioning of the government, improve and permit innovation in government work, improve overall human health, and benefit every aspect of society. But more importantly it will provide 600 billion dollars to the US government and add 30% to the budgets of most states to give back as lowered tax or use for actually useful work.
Now we have increased unemployment by 20% and, combined with aggregating all dirrect welfare, raised 2.5 trillion dollars. We can hand out $646 to every man, woman and child.* But wait! There's more!
Giving money for each child is probably unwise
12 million of those people are illegal immigrants.
People will refuse to work in overly dangerous jobs.
People will tend to not be forced to commit crimes to survive
People will refuse to work in particularly unpleasant jobs.
The extra money will give people the security they need to try and start companies, make and try to sell inventions, and go to school
People will quit their jobs to care for their children
everyone who lives for their art will have enough money to practice full time
People will have time to work for charity.
The net effect of these will be to disincentivise illegal immigration, (lowering the cost to prevent that) force companies to improve working conditions, encourage automation, get children off the streets (deprive gangs of new members), largely eliminate homelessnes
I started a post with the aim to thoroughly rebuke you and refute your claim. The first place I looked was a Google search for standard warranties which gives US manufacturers' warranties as about the same lengths as foreign warranties. Next I looked for how well manufcaturers actually stand by their warranties. The number of hate articles and lawsuits over various foreign and domestic manufacturers' warranties seems about the same. Cars still on the road is another way to look at reliability. After some research I have come to the conclusion that the oldest cars longevity isn't related to quality of manufacture but rather dedication of the owners, older common cars are foreign -- but that doesn't count toward my point since the increase in US manufacturers' quality is relatively recent -- and common cars aging on the road today are about the same across country of manufacture.*
The late 1980's and early 1990's saw Honda et al. Eating Ford's lunch and US manufacturers' advertising focused on brand recognition. Laterads focused on features. Since this is a case of competing against quality with features (and because Tesla) I'm not even going to contest that US manufacturers ever fell behind on features.
Foreign cars still dominate in the mileage category but that alone is insufficient to state in the grand sweeping way I did that US made cars are inferior.
In short I stand corrected. US manufacturers have fully caught up with foreign makers in most categories of vehicle quality.
Audi, BMW, Porche, Volkswagen, Honda, Ford, Mazda, Mitssubishi, Nissan, Subaru, and Toyota weren't sitting on their thumbs in the 15 years it took GM, Ford, and Chevrolet to get their cars up to snuff.
In that time every category of safety, performance, features, and mileage received a huge improvement with no significant increase in cost. Across the board, across manufacturer and country borders. The gap has closed but foreign makers raised the bar again. Frankly I won't be surprised (or morn) if Chevy goes out of business completely. US manufacturers still have some innovation to do. They should start with expiring patents from Japan.
This is factually incorrect. Even assuming single payer medical care is done separately and paid for all the welfare in the US a generous (Obama's)probable discretionary budget generously proportioned (assume 100% of labor, agriculture, housing, veterans benefits, and internal affairs budget go to welfare) gives 320 billion to welfare. Divided by the population of the US that's a little over $1000 per person. Now add mandatory spending (the above link includes this information) and assume 100% of food and social security spending counts as welfare, again divide by the population of the US. That's about $4400 per person. Total: $5400 per person and that assumes not a cent is needed for program administration. Your proposed amount of basic income comes to $450 per person, per month. If you want that to rise to a number people can live on you're going to have to significantly raise taxes or print 33 to 50 percent more money.
Given the percentage of people who cannot be profitably employed today and given the rate at which technology is increasing that percentage I believe basic income is an absolute necessity. But we need to be realistic at how much it costs and create a realistic plan for implementing it.
You're implying the means of production must by some economic law be owned by enough rich people to hire everyone else, or that the rich who own the means of production must want enough personal service to support everyone else. There's no reason to believe either of these things.
I've been asking WolframAlpha this on an semiannual basis for years. I'm hoping it will rise to the level of "decent" some time and be able to provide an answer.
You're assuming the limiting factor is desire as opposed to the availability of chucking wood. Would a woodchuck have as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck then it's possible he would chuck as much as he could chuck.
Programming in good code isn't hard at all. What's hard is programming well when you're on the fifth "all hands on deck" rush job this year, you have two years of experience and no training because your company was too cheap to pay a decent wage or train you, a humiliating and useless performance review is just 'round the corner, and you doubt anything you type will end up in the final product.
The problem is a widespread cultural one. When IT companies are willing to spend the time and money for consistent quality that's when they'll start to put out quality products.
In the US public transportation is not properly funded. To even get to work on time on a regular basis it's not uncommon to need a car. I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your comment. Fuck you for spreading misinformation.
I AM in the US and after being asked which "ad experience" I want, not selecting one, and being shown a car ad anyway the film failed to play. Fuck hulu
I don't want ANYONE looking in my email and I don't want to require my friends and email to have to set up security just to read emails from me. What's the best email service offering end-to-end encryption?
Amusing but wrong. You can't use "the people on top are men" to mean "all men are on top" And neither negates the very real hostility men experience in the form of "dumb dad" stereotypes, more severe punishments for equal crimes, biased family courts, the pervasive idea that men are dangerous, and many more.
Meaty? Read it, this couldn't be more toothless. Besides adding permission via "emergency order", countless opportunities for judicial review to be used to overturn any part of it, enshrining 180 days holding of records without any review or consequence, and the two hops thing the bill has as many loopholes as could possibly by inserted. Unless by "meatless" you meant this abortion, in which case I completely agree.
This bill is entirely superficial. It's nice as a first step but the "two hops" bit makes it essentially meaningless pending further significant reform. It can be twisted to allow the level of surveillance we see today and it can be twisted that way in secret courts and closed meetings by bribed and blackmailed politicians. This is not the real reform that we need.
Ends the secret courts. Ends the closed door meetings. Establishes new definitions, clear ones to be used across all laws to stop the bullshit about "keeping America safe" by abusing its freedom. We need real reform not this lip service for the masses shit.
I would support a bill that
Does everything this bill does
Eliminates bullshit about hops, replacing it with a laborious per-item review and a per-item declassification requirement.
Requires judicial review by judges outside of the political process for every state secret
Guts the Patriot act
Recognizes metadata as private information when used in certain ways
Forces a real human to press the button on every bit of surveillance done eliminating dragnets.
Hailing this as an effective law on its own is a mistake and the freedom of the United States is in serious jeopardy. Let's not step off that cliff.
If for reasons of cultural sensitivity they wanted to stop the explosion at our smallest common* unit of time they would use 1 second plus expansion time. Now a soccer ball is 11 cm in radius. If we assume the expansion to that size is done at light speed it will arrive there in.00000000003669 seconds. So they'll stop the experiment at t-1..00000000003669 seconds. They must use very precise clocks.
Prove very little and when published in a form like this prove even less. Sexual harassment and assault are highly politicized and in many cases overstated. When the mere accusation of sexual harassment in the form of making dongle jokes in a private conversation can end careers it's blatant sexism to claim it's not taken seriously enough. Sexism? yes: spreading fear that men are abusive and dangerous.
Ive personally never heard of a man in the games industry getting rape threats for having an opinion.
Death threats are every bit as common. Being a different gender means the hatred may be sexualized. "No rape threats against men" is a piss poor measure. How about coming up with some actual numbers reflecting the supposedly heightened hostility against women? Because no I won't take your word for it.
Many men believe women have no worth in the games industry beyond appearance. The video game industry is particularly egregious at only representing women as sex objects. As such, many gamers are trained to only see women in that context.
Would you care to back that up with facts? A survey maybe? Because it sounds like you pulled it straight from whence many of your other claims come. One sexist asshole does not a culture make. There are many games with strongfemale characters. And don't say sexy clothes prove gamers are sexist unless you want to talk about the thousands of hulking, musclebound men in games.
This kind of harassment leaves long-lasting damage. It affects our friendships, and can cause us to be distant from others.
So your overly sensitive friend proves that the same hatred is worse when leveled against women? Equality means standing up for yourself. If you want to be a damsel in distress you don't want equality.
Women in the industry are told by men what is valid for us to feel.
No, women in general are told they're special and need everyone to cater to them. Then the gaming industry didn't cater as much garnering feminist ire. You can feel whatever you want but so can I.
Natural communication? In a crowded airport with a machine? Pull the other one, it squeaks.
Artificial intelligence is nowhere near good enough to translate "I want an isle seat for my son and TIMMY STOP POKING YOUR SISTER, sorry, An isle seat for my son and I have a Delta flight from Dallas, can you make sure it will arrive in time to connect?" That's the kind of thing human attendants can cope with easily. The best kind of interface for ticketing is an unintelligent wizard on a touch screen with big icons and a "help" button for an attendant.
You're right: absolutely nothing is free.
Except Linux and Chrome and Internet Explorer and Java and TCP and pictures of the Alps and FreeCiv and Libre Office and Wikipedia and the RepRap design and CERN data and the open hardware repository and NIH publications and water filter designs and Acura NSX blueprints and clothing patterns and Project Gutenberg and the Internet Archive and don't even think about saying they're "not really free". In all cases we're talking about voluntary contributions of work. Games are as digital as all of these others and claiming no game is free in that context is total bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
How does that work anyway? It seems like malware but it's got to be pretty sophisticated to post in other users' names on Slashdot and it doesn't seem worth it for a human to make new accounts just to post that crap. Either the payoff is far higher than I imagine, it's actually a test for something else (astroturfing?) or mycleanpc lost a shitload of money for a tiny bit of SEO.
In any case I dearly hope Slashdot doesn't turn to captchas to prevent that type of post.
Do trolls bother you so much that you're willing to give up a basic freedom to stop them? I just can't understand that frame of mind.
I most certainly do NOT want anyone else defining and banning "trolls". It's a very short trip from mods deciding who a troll is to mods censoring speech they don't like. I've seen that trip taken on many forums.
Only a very short list of very obviously unacceptable behavior needs to be banned: illegal material, obvious spam, and frequently repeated copypasta. There are many things I would rather not read from frosty piss to Obama's duke to grits but it's well worth reading those to be sure my own speech is free and the opinions I read are organically derived.
I agree that this would be a very cost effective and simple way to administer the program, ideal in every way. Furthermore since a tax cut (even an unearned âoeearned incomeâ tax credit) is politically much more viable.
I feel health care is outside the appropriate scope of this conversation, so I won't address your comments on that matter.
As user sillybilly pointed out your numbers for doubling the UBI provision are off by a factor of ten. But you're underestimating the amount that can be wrung from other programs. Corporate tax cuts amount to a trillion dollars of spending. I'm not arguing that this is free money. Eliminating these cuts will have a profound and negative effect on the economy if they're not replaced with explicit measures elsewhere. Companies will stop research the tax cuts incentivise, many will try to move overseas, With all the dirty money in US politics it will be difficult to eliminate the cuts anyway. On the other hand a new law that directly eliminates the less helpful corporate tax breaks and move any incentives to a direct and openly debated form would not only help take corporate money out of politics but raise half a trillion dollars a year.
Furthermore a huge amount of the US budget and state budgets amount to welfare in the form of jobs programs. We're making hundreds of billions of dollars of unneeded military equipment to save jobs. Our military is overmanned to help keep unemployment low. We allow many governmental departments to become bloated just to keep offering those jobs. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Look in any political speech and you'll find that word. What's needed is a complete change of focus. The aim isn't to keep people active, it's to keep them fed, clothed, and mentally healthy. Eliminate every jobs program. That alone will cut the military by 1/3, speed the functioning of the government, improve and permit innovation in government work, improve overall human health, and benefit every aspect of society. But more importantly it will provide 600 billion dollars to the US government and add 30% to the budgets of most states to give back as lowered tax or use for actually useful work.
Now we have increased unemployment by 20% and, combined with aggregating all dirrect welfare, raised 2.5 trillion dollars. We can hand out $646 to every man, woman and child.* But wait! There's more!
12 million of those people are illegal immigrants.
The net effect of these will be to disincentivise illegal immigration, (lowering the cost to prevent that) force companies to improve working conditions, encourage automation, get children off the streets (deprive gangs of new members), largely eliminate homelessnes
I started a post with the aim to thoroughly rebuke you and refute your claim. The first place I looked was a Google search for standard warranties which gives US manufacturers' warranties as about the same lengths as foreign warranties. Next I looked for how well manufcaturers actually stand by their warranties. The number of hate articles and lawsuits over various foreign and domestic manufacturers' warranties seems about the same. Cars still on the road is another way to look at reliability. After some research I have come to the conclusion that the oldest cars longevity isn't related to quality of manufacture but rather dedication of the owners, older common cars are foreign -- but that doesn't count toward my point since the increase in US manufacturers' quality is relatively recent -- and common cars aging on the road today are about the same across country of manufacture.*
The late 1980's and early 1990's saw Honda et al. Eating Ford's lunch and US manufacturers' advertising focused on brand recognition. Later ads focused on features. Since this is a case of competing against quality with features (and because Tesla) I'm not even going to contest that US manufacturers ever fell behind on features.
Foreign cars still dominate in the mileage category but that alone is insufficient to state in the grand sweeping way I did that US made cars are inferior.
In short I stand corrected. US manufacturers have fully caught up with foreign makers in most categories of vehicle quality.
*excluding outliers.
Audi, BMW, Porche, Volkswagen, Honda, Ford, Mazda, Mitssubishi, Nissan, Subaru, and Toyota weren't sitting on their thumbs in the 15 years it took GM, Ford, and Chevrolet to get their cars up to snuff.
In that time every category of safety, performance, features, and mileage received a huge improvement with no significant increase in cost. Across the board, across manufacturer and country borders. The gap has closed but foreign makers raised the bar again. Frankly I won't be surprised (or morn) if Chevy goes out of business completely. US manufacturers still have some innovation to do. They should start with expiring patents from Japan.
It would cost no more than current systems
This is factually incorrect. Even assuming single payer medical care is done separately and paid for all the welfare in the US a generous (Obama's)probable discretionary budget generously proportioned (assume 100% of labor, agriculture, housing, veterans benefits, and internal affairs budget go to welfare) gives 320 billion to welfare. Divided by the population of the US that's a little over $1000 per person. Now add mandatory spending (the above link includes this information) and assume 100% of food and social security spending counts as welfare, again divide by the population of the US. That's about $4400 per person. Total: $5400 per person and that assumes not a cent is needed for program administration. Your proposed amount of basic income comes to $450 per person, per month. If you want that to rise to a number people can live on you're going to have to significantly raise taxes or print 33 to 50 percent more money.
Given the percentage of people who cannot be profitably employed today and given the rate at which technology is increasing that percentage I believe basic income is an absolute necessity. But we need to be realistic at how much it costs and create a realistic plan for implementing it.
You're implying the means of production must by some economic law be owned by enough rich people to hire everyone else, or that the rich who own the means of production must want enough personal service to support everyone else. There's no reason to believe either of these things.
I've been asking WolframAlpha this on an semiannual basis for years. I'm hoping it will rise to the level of "decent" some time and be able to provide an answer.
You're assuming the limiting factor is desire as opposed to the availability of chucking wood. Would a woodchuck have as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck then it's possible he would chuck as much as he could chuck.
Programming in good code isn't hard at all. What's hard is programming well when you're on the fifth "all hands on deck" rush job this year, you have two years of experience and no training because your company was too cheap to pay a decent wage or train you, a humiliating and useless performance review is just 'round the corner, and you doubt anything you type will end up in the final product. The problem is a widespread cultural one. When IT companies are willing to spend the time and money for consistent quality that's when they'll start to put out quality products.
In the US public transportation is not properly funded. To even get to work on time on a regular basis it's not uncommon to need a car. I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your comment. Fuck you for spreading misinformation.
I AM in the US and after being asked which "ad experience" I want, not selecting one, and being shown a car ad anyway the film failed to play. Fuck hulu
I don't want ANYONE looking in my email and I don't want to require my friends and email to have to set up security just to read emails from me. What's the best email service offering end-to-end encryption?
Amusing but wrong. You can't use "the people on top are men" to mean "all men are on top" And neither negates the very real hostility men experience in the form of "dumb dad" stereotypes, more severe punishments for equal crimes, biased family courts, the pervasive idea that men are dangerous, and many more.
Testosterone and violence are not correlated.
Meaty? Read it, this couldn't be more toothless. Besides adding permission via "emergency order", countless opportunities for judicial review to be used to overturn any part of it, enshrining 180 days holding of records without any review or consequence, and the two hops thing the bill has as many loopholes as could possibly by inserted. Unless by "meatless" you meant this abortion, in which case I completely agree.
This bill is entirely superficial. It's nice as a first step but the "two hops" bit makes it essentially meaningless pending further significant reform. It can be twisted to allow the level of surveillance we see today and it can be twisted that way in secret courts and closed meetings by bribed and blackmailed politicians. This is not the real reform that we need.
Ends the secret courts. Ends the closed door meetings. Establishes new definitions, clear ones to be used across all laws to stop the bullshit about "keeping America safe" by abusing its freedom. We need real reform not this lip service for the masses shit.
I would support a bill that
Hailing this as an effective law on its own is a mistake and the freedom of the United States is in serious jeopardy. Let's not step off that cliff.
the Fukushima 'explosions' were actually by design
Are you actually claiming it was considered okay for large explosions to burst open containment in a nuclear plant in melt-down?
If for reasons of cultural sensitivity they wanted to stop the explosion at our smallest common* unit of time they would use 1 second plus expansion time. Now a soccer ball is 11 cm in radius. If we assume the expansion to that size is done at light speed it will arrive there in .00000000003669 seconds. So they'll stop the experiment at t-1..00000000003669 seconds. They must use very precise clocks.
*yes I know bout clock ticks, just go with it.
I don't believe it actually happens that way. Would you care to debate the point?
anecdotes
Prove very little and when published in a form like this prove even less. Sexual harassment and assault are highly politicized and in many cases overstated. When the mere accusation of sexual harassment in the form of making dongle jokes in a private conversation can end careers it's blatant sexism to claim it's not taken seriously enough. Sexism? yes: spreading fear that men are abusive and dangerous.
Ive personally never heard of a man in the games industry getting rape threats for having an opinion.
Death threats are every bit as common. Being a different gender means the hatred may be sexualized. "No rape threats against men" is a piss poor measure. How about coming up with some actual numbers reflecting the supposedly heightened hostility against women? Because no I won't take your word for it.
Many men believe women have no worth in the games industry beyond appearance.
The video game industry is particularly egregious at only representing women as sex objects. As such, many gamers are trained to only see women in that context.
Would you care to back that up with facts? A survey maybe? Because it sounds like you pulled it straight from whence many of your other claims come. One sexist asshole does not a culture make. There are many games with strongfemale characters. And don't say sexy clothes prove gamers are sexist unless you want to talk about the thousands of hulking, musclebound men in games.
This kind of harassment leaves long-lasting damage. It affects our friendships, and can cause us to be distant from others.
So your overly sensitive friend proves that the same hatred is worse when leveled against women? Equality means standing up for yourself. If you want to be a damsel in distress you don't want equality.
Women in the industry are told by men what is valid for us to feel.
No, women in general are told they're special and need everyone to cater to them. Then the gaming industry didn't cater as much garnering feminist ire. You can feel whatever you want but so can I.
Even on Earth there are a lot of creatures that can survive conditions far outside the normal range.
Natural communication? In a crowded airport with a machine? Pull the other one, it squeaks.
Artificial intelligence is nowhere near good enough to translate "I want an isle seat for my son and TIMMY STOP POKING YOUR SISTER, sorry, An isle seat for my son and I have a Delta flight from Dallas, can you make sure it will arrive in time to connect?" That's the kind of thing human attendants can cope with easily. The best kind of interface for ticketing is an unintelligent wizard on a touch screen with big icons and a "help" button for an attendant.
You're right: absolutely nothing is free. Except Linux and Chrome and Internet Explorer and Java and TCP and pictures of the Alps and FreeCiv and Libre Office and Wikipedia and the RepRap design and CERN data and the open hardware repository and NIH publications and water filter designs and Acura NSX blueprints and clothing patterns and Project Gutenberg and the Internet Archive and don't even think about saying they're "not really free". In all cases we're talking about voluntary contributions of work. Games are as digital as all of these others and claiming no game is free in that context is total bullshit.